m 


)    i 


.    lli  IIIUIH 


\ 


IlltU 


\ 


• 
\'tt    '  ! 

: 


lillll  Mill    i 


ill 


i  lUilil 


University  of  California. 


: 


' 


.  r  of 


FROftt  Tl  "F 

A  N  C  I  S     L  I  i  R , ' 

,-  and  La\v  in  Columbia  College,  IS'ew  Y 


cirx  OF 


MICHAEL     REESi 

Of  San  Francis 
1  B  7  3  . 


S  P  I RAT ION 


<8u(ftontt,  wv  f  ntuitJow ; 


OR, 


THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 


OF  THE 


HOLY  SCRIPTURES. 


SECOND     SERIES. 


BY      ELEAZAH      LORD 


NEW-YORK : 
A.     D.     F.     RANDOLPH,     683      BROADWAY. 

1858. 


ENTERED,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1858,  by 
ELEAZAR    LORD, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New-York. 


JOHN  A.  GRAY,  Printer  and  Stereotype^ 

16  &  18  Jacob  St.,  Fire-Proof  Buildings. 


P  E  E  F  AC  E. 


THE  present  fulfills  an  intimation  expressed  at  the  close  of  the  former 
Volume  under  the  same  title. 

The  most  striking  feature  of  the  very  numerous,  learned,  philosophi- 
cal, and  theological  treatises  of  modern  times,  on  the  subject  of  In- 
spiration, is  that  of  their  various  and  inconsistent  definitions,  theories, 
and  speculations.     It  is  remarkable  that,  at  a  period  characterized  as 
preeminently  the  age  of  Bibles,  when  the  Protestant  world,  aware  of 
the  Divine  purposes  to  be  fulfilled  by  the  universal  diffusion  of  the 
Sacred  Oracles,  is  engaged  in  the  publication  of  them  in  the  lan- 
guages of  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  their  inspiration,  the  basis  of 
their  claim  to  infallibility  and  Divine  authority,  should,  by  one  class 
of  writers,  be  asserted  on  erroneous  and  fallacious  principles ;  and  by 
other  classes,  be  openly  assailed,  impugned,  or  denied,  upon  various 
contradictory  and  hostile  theories  and  assumptions ;  that  learned  and 
orthodox  men  of  the  one  class,  who  hold  the  Scriptures  to  be  the  in- 
fallible word  of  God,  should  assume  that  infallible  guidance  of  the 
sacred  writers,  instead  of  a  conveyance  to  their  minds  of  the  infallible 
thoughts  and  words  which  they  were  to  record,  was  the  object  and 
end  of  Inspiration  ;  and  that  men  of  the  other  class  should  treat  the 
subject  as  involving  no  specific  element  of  infallibility  whatever.     On 
the  one  hand,  a  state  of  things,  in  all  respects  unprecedented,  exists  in 
regard  to  the  means  and  facilities  of  diffusing  the  Oracles  of  God 
among  all  nations ;  on  the  other,  the  plenary  inspiration  and  Divine 
authority  of  those  Oracles  is  called  in  question  in  new  and  imposing 
forms  of  theory  and  speculation. 


iy  PEEFACE. 

The  organizations,  efforts,  and  agencies  of  Protestant  Christendom 
for  the   dissemination  of  the  Scriptures,  proceed  upon  the  avowed 
principle  and  belief  that  they  are  the  infallible  Word  of  God.     This  it 
is  that  demands,  encourages,  and  justifies  those  efforts,  and-  the  vast 
array  of  preparations  which  have  been  made  for  their  enlargement ; 
and,  at  the  same  time,  is  the  sure  ground  of  confidence  that  they  will 
be  persevered  in  and  extended,  till  the  earth  is  filled  with  the  know- 
ledge of  Jehovah,  when  men  shall  see  eye  to  eye,  shall  be  of  one  mind 
as  to  what  the  Scriptures  teach,  and  there  shall  be  one  Lord,  and  His 
Name  one — the  manifestation  of  His  perfections,  acts,  and  purposes 
being  made  and  declared  alike  to  all.     On  the  other  hand,  the  great 
adversary  of  those  oracles  seeks,  through  such  instrumentalities  as  he 
can  influence,  to  impeach  their  Divine  authority,  deny  their  inspira- 
tion, and  destroy  all  confidence  in  their  infallibility.     Hence,  as  the 
conflict  is  evidently  tending  to  a  single  point — that  of  the  nature  of 
Inspiration,  or  the  nature,  extent,  and  effects  of  that  Inspiration  which 
is  affirmed  of  the  Holy  Scriptures — we  may  reasonably  expect,  that, 
as  those  Divinely  appointed  means  of  reformation  and  salvation  shall 
be  more  and  more  widely  diffused  among  the  families  of  the  earth,  the 
opposing  efforts  will  be  more  and  more  exerted  against  this  cardinal 
point.     The  earlier  grounds  and  methods  of  opposition  to  the  claims 
of  the  Sacred  Oracles  have  failed.     The  Church  still  exists,  and  with 
more  energy,  confidence,  and  hope  than  ever,  is  erecting  her  standard 
in  every  land ;  and  the  characteristics  of  those  whose  faith  rests  solely 
on  the  Scriptures  as  the  inspired  and  infallible  Word  of  God,  remain 
unchanged. 

Externally,  Christianity  and  the  Bible  have  been  assailed  at  every 
point.  Philosophical  and  speculative  theories  of  man,  and  of  nature, 
have  assumed  all  the  forms  and  hues,  it  may  be  presumed,  of  which 
they  are  capable.  Criticism  is  exhausted,  and  dying  of  atrophy.  The 
mystic  echoes  of  senseless  matter,  of  mummies,  of  lavas,  of  fossil  bones, 
and  nether  rocks,  have  been  evoked  to  little  purpose.  Psychology,  phy- 
siology, and  a  score  of  other  ologies,  have  been  explored  in  search  of  ar- 
guments against  the  supernatural  and  the  historical  claims  of  the  sacred 


PKEFACE.  V 

volume.  Under  one  leadership  or  another,  of  professed  friends,  or 
open  enemies,  all  the  phenomena  of  nature  have  been  arrayed  against 
the  written  words  of  the  Self-Existent  Author  of  nature.  But  these 
appliances  have  resulted  in  no  tangible  evidence,  no  rational  con- 
viction, no  stable  conclusion,  nothing  satisfactory.  The  nature  of 
evidence  has  been  discussed,  as  if  those  whose  faith  in  the  Divine 
inspiration,  authority,  and  infallibility  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  is  so  un- 
wavering and  effective  as  to  work  a  change  of  their  hearts,  reform 
their  lives,  deliver  them  from  fear,  and  make  them  triumphant  even  in 
death,  needed  to  be  informed  why  they  believed,  or  on  what  kind  of 
evidence  a  real  faith  must  necessarily  rest.  Logic,  as  the  science  of 
evidence,  is  set  up,  as  a  scaling-ladder  in  a  siege,  with  its  steps  and 
rounds  of  intuition  and  induction,  and  planted  on  that  ground  of  in- 
tuition in  the  mind  itself  which  excludes  all  external  testimony,  and 
all  supernatural  works  and  revelations ;  and  is  made  to  pronounce  self- 
evidence  to  be  no  evidence.  The  apostles  of  idealism,  pantheism,  and 
rationalism,  on  the  continent,  assert  and  argue  that  there  is  nothing 
supernatural  and  divine  in  Inspiration,  nothing  that  is  not  common  to 
all  mankind,  nothing  peculiar  to  any,  except  in  degree.  Recent  pub- 
lications of  ministers,  theological  teachers,  philosophical  speculators, 
and  critics,  in  England,  exhibit  equally  degenerate  views.  In  a  labored 
treatise  by  the  Rev.  John  Macnaught,  a  clergyman  of  the  Established 
Church,  Inspiration  is  thus  defined  :  "  The  term  signifies  that  action 
of  the  Divine  Spirit  by  which,  apart  from  any  idea  of  infallibility,  all 
that  is  good  in  man,  beast,  or  matter,  is  originated  and  sustained," 
(p.  163  ;)  and  Rev.  Mr.  Maurice,  professor  of  Divinity  in  Kings  Col- 
lege, London,  teaches  that  there  is  no  difference  between  the  inspiring 
influences  of  the  Spirit,  and  those  influences  which  are  common  to  all 
Christians. 

It  is  especially  since  the  outburst  of  new  and  extraordinary  agencies 
in  translating,  printing,  and  disseminating  the  "Word  of  God  through- 
out the  earth,  that  the  rationalistic  and  pantheistic  theories  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  plenary  inspiration,  Divine  authority,  and  infallibility  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  have  been  put  forth.  The  adverse  demonstrations 


VI  PREFACE. 

have  kept  pace  with  the  progress  of  natural  science  and  speculative 
philosophy,  and  with  the  provocatives  of  the  depraved  heart  to  infi- 
delity and  atheism  which  are  derived  from  the  successful  progress  of 
Christian  efforts  in  the  diffusion  of  the  Scriptures.  Meantime,  while 
the  resources  of  naturalism  and  rationalism  have  been  plied,  and  have 
been  aided  by  the  arts  of  dissimulation,  of  indirect  assault,  of  affected 
proffers  of  reconciliation,  of  conceding  as  to  its  essence  what  is  claimed 
to  be  revelation,  while  rejecting  the  words  which  express  it,  and  of 
scrupulosity,  or  of  hypocrisy,  in  deeming  what  science  is  said  to  teach 
to  be  a  safer  ground  of  inference  than  the  text  of  Scripture ;  the 
Christian  party  have  gained  much — much  in  confidence,  in  concentra- 
tion of  effort,  in  the  facilities  of  translating,  of  printing,  and  of  dissem- 
inating copies  of  the  inspired  word,  in  the  removal  of  obstacles  to  their 
action,  which,  in  respect  to  large  portions  of  the  human  race,  were 
formerly  insurmountable,  in  the  countenance  and  sanction  of  civil 
governments,  and  in  the  public  opinion  both  of  civilized  and  uncivilized 
nations. 

Regarding  the  subject  in  this  light,  and  considering  the  source  and 
nature  of  the  hostile  efforts,  it  is  natural  to  conclude  that  the  contro- 
versy will  be  narrowed  down  to  the  question  of  plenary  divine  inspira- 
tion— at  least  to  a  degree  hitherto  unknown.  For  on  the  belief  of 
that  doctrine  all  the  efforts  for  the*  publication  and  diffusion  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures  in  the  various  languages  of  the  earth  are,  avowedly, 
based,  and  unless  that  doctrine  can  be  subverted  there  is  no  resource  of 
opposition  left,  in  a  way  of  argument,  that  can  promise  to  be  of  any 
avail.  And  unless  that  doctrine  can  be  subverted,  and  the  infallibility 
of  reason,  or  that  of  the  papal  Hierarchy,  be  sustained,  physical  means 
of  coercion  will  naturally  be  resorted  to. 

There  is,  moreover,  in  the  present  aspect  of  the  whole  subject,  rea- 
son to  conclude,  that  the  sacred  volume  will  increasingly  more  and 
more,  be  employed,  honored  and  vindicated  by  its  Divine  Author  as 
the  instrument  of  accomplishing  the  purposes  which  He  has  therein  dis- 
closed concerning  the  overthrow  of  all  false  systems  and  the  illumina- 
tion and  conversion  of  mankind.  Apparently  what  has  hitherto  been 


PREFACE.  Vll 

done,  is  but  preliminary.  The  Divine  Wisdom  has  seen  fit,  in  the 
great  drama  of  Providence  and  the  trial  of  fallen  human  nature  before 
the  face  of  the  universe,  to  permit  the  abettors  of  infidelity  and  error 
in  all  their  forms,  fully  to  manifest  themselves.  A  change  of  scene  is, 
seemingly,  at  hand.  The  "  last  days,"  the  period  when  the  gospel  is 
to  be  communicated  to  all  nations,  when  by  means  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures the  earth  is  to  be  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah,  as  the 
waters  fill  the  places  of  the  deep,  are  drawing  nigh.  Translations  into 
all  the  principal  languages  have  been  accomplished ;  facilities  of  print- 
ing and  publication  have  been  multiplied ;  the  difficulties  of  access  to 
the  most  populous  nations,  have  passed,  or  are  passing  away  :  and  it  is 
becoming  evident  to  Bible  Societies  and  their  agents,  that  the  Divine 
Word,  which  they  disseminate,  is  to  be  more  and  more  conspicuously, 
the  direct  means  of  subverting  error  and  changing  the  sentiments  and 
hearts  of  men.  By  that  means  multitudes,  whole  tribes,  whole  nations, 
may,  as  easily  as  here  and  there  an  individual,  be  taught  of  God,  and 
turned  from  darkness  to  light.  The  deficiency  of  converted  men  to  be 
educated  and  fitted  to  be  preachers,  qualified  and  furnished  to  en- 
counter all  the  heresies  and  errors  of  the  Christian  and  the  Anti- 
Christian  world,  may  cease  to  be  an  obstacle  to  the  universal  propaga- 
tion and  triumph  of  the  Gospel.  The  word  of  God  and  the  testimony 
of  witnessing  converts,  evangelists,  colporteurs,  raised  up  for  the  pur- 
pose, both  in  regions  partially  occupied  by  ordained  ministers  of  the 
Gospel,  and  in  regions  inaccessible  to  them — may  by  the  Spirit,  poured 
out  from  on  high,  be  rendered  effectual  to  the  pulling  down  of  strong- 
holds, and  overcoming  the  armies  of  the  aliens. 

The  various  forms  of  antagonism  to  the  Bible,  as  exhibited  hitherto, 
have  failed  of  any  decisive  and  permanent  success,  and  are  no  longer 
likely  to  attract  supporters  ;  which,  in  connection  with  the  growing  in- 
fluence and  onward  progress  of  the  Bible  itself  in  its  proper  mission, 
strongly  indicates  that  the  opposing  forces  will  be  driven  to  concen- 
trate their  attacks  on  the  Divine  Inspiration  and  authority  of  the 
Scriptures  themselves,  instead  of  trusting  to  a  predatory  warfare  on 
their  outposts. 


viii  PKEFACE. 

f 

But  if  the  course  of  events  suggests  this,  the  principles  on  which  the 
opposing  parties  depend,  and  to  which  they  seem  to  be  irretrievably 
reduced,  still  more  distinctly  indicate  the  same  result.  The  foundation 
principle  of  the  philosophical  theories  now  in  the  ascendant,  is,  that 
there  isL  no  absolute  and  immutable  Truth — that  whatever  any  system 
may  pretend  to  as  truth,  is  only  relative,  and  is  no  further  the  same  to 
one  mind  as  to  another,  than  the  knowledge  and  observation  of  physi- 
cal and  mental  phenomena  of  one  corresponds  to  that  of  the  other. 
That  which  assumes  the  aspect  of  truth,  at  one  time,  in  relation  to 
those  phenomena  as  then  observed,  may  cease  to  have  that  aspect  at 
another  time,  or  as  the  things  observed  are  different,  or  are  regarded 
in  a  different  light.  In  short,  what  are  called  truths  being  not  abso- 
lutely, but  only  relatively  such,  may  be  opposed  to  each  other ;  and 
therefore  all  opinions,  religions,  and  creeds  may  be  equally  true  as 
held  at  different  periods,  by  different  peoples,  or  as  held  together. 

But  if  the  Scriptures  are  divinely  inspired,  if  they  are  the  Word  of 
God,  then  they  are  infallible  and  immutable  truth,  and  as  such  are  the 
direct  point  of  attack  and  denial,  to  the  dogmas  of  philosophy. 

Again  the  Romish  Hierarchy  while  professing  to  receive  the  Scrip- 
tures as  of  Divine  inspiration,  are  opposed  to  the  dissemination  of  them 
among  the  people.  But  they  do  not  in  fact  receive  them  as  infallible, 
immutable,  and  conclusive.  On  the  contrary,  they  hold  that  the  su- 
preme ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  Church  of  Rome  is  invested  with 
infallibility  to  decide  what  shall  be  received  as  truth.  Their  system 
rests  on  this  dogma  ;  and  to  maintain  it,  they  must  deny  the  inspiration 
and  infallibility  of  the  Scriptures.  For  the  Divine  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures  is  the  ground  of  their  infallibility,  and  to  assert  another  in- 
fallibility, which  may  add  to  or  diminish  aught  from  them,  is  to  deny 
their  inspiration  ;  it  is  to  deny  that  they  are  the  words  of  God,  to  as- 
sert an  authority  superior  to  theirs,  and  to  claim  plenary  authority  and 
discretion  to  suppress  and  annul  them,  and  to  add  apocryphal  books 
to  the  original  canon,  and  new  articles  of  faith  and  practice. 

It  is  admitted  on  both  sides  that  infallibility  in  respect  to  what  must 
be  believed  in  order  to  salvation,  is  absolutely  necessary.    The  Holy 


PKEFACE.  ix 

« 
Scriptures  claim  to  be  infallible  on  the  ground  that  they  are  the  words 

of  God,  given,  imparted,  expressed,  to  the  sacred  writers  by  inspira- 
tion of  God.  If  He  is  infallible  and  immutable,  then  what  He  said, 
what  He  spake  by  the  Prophets  and  Apostles,  and  inspired  into  their 
minds  and  moved  them  to  write,  is  infallible  and  immutable.  This  is 
the  argument  of  Protestants.  They  believe  in  the  absolute  infallibility 
of  God ;  they  believe  the  Scriptures  to  be  His  word,  and  as  such  be- 
lieve them  to  be  infallible ;  they  believe  their  articles  of  faith  solely  on 
the  authority  of  God,  because  those  articles  are  expressly  taught  and 
affirmed  in  His  Word  ;  their  faith  rests  solely  on  the  authority  of  God, 
as  expressed  in  His  own  word ;  they  receive  and  believe  no  article  of 
faith  on  the  authority  or  testimony  of  "  any  man  or  church." 

True,  they  must  be  satisfied  by  examination,  reason,  argument,  that 
the  Scriptures  are  the  Word  of  God,  given  by  His  inspiration.  But  so 
on  the  other  hand  must  the  Romanist,  whose  faith  rests  on  the  author- 
ity and  alleged  inspiration  of  the  sovereign  pontiff,  ascertain  by  the 
exercise  of  his  reason,  the  nature  and  ground  of  th*e  pontiff's  claims, 
and  what  his  decisions  and  prescriptions  are,  and  what  articles  of  faith 
and  rules  of  life,  he  promulgates  and  enjoins  on  them.  In  the  nature 
of  things,  the  meaning  of  his  dogmas,  rescripts,  and  decrees,  must  be 
determined  by  his  words  in  the  same  way  that  the  meaning  of  the 
words  of  God  as  written  in  the  Scripture  must  be  determined.  A 
Romanist  who  believes  the  Pope  to  be  inspired  and  infallible,  can  not 
be  any  more  certain  that  he  rightly  understands  what  the  Pope  says, 
than  a  Protestant  can  be  certain  that  he  understands  what  God  says 
in  His  word ;  and  in  adopting  the  articles  of  faith  of  the  papal  system> 
the  papist  exercises  his  private  judgment,  as  really  as  the  Protestant 
in  adopting  the  Scriptures  as  the  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  life.  An 
inspiration  of  the  Pope,  were  it  real,  could  no  more  make  his  words 
intelligible  and  infallible,  than  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  makes 
them  intelligible  and  infallible.  The  difference  beween  the  two  cases 
is,  that  the  Protestant's  faith  rests  directly  on  the  authority  of  God, 
while  the  papist's  faith  rests  on  the  alleged  authority  of  man  in  the 
person  of  the  Pope  under  his  claim  of  inspiration.  To  give  the  papist 


X  PREFACE. 

m 

any  advantage  in  respect  to  the  use  of  reason,  private  judgment,  and 
infallible  certainty,  he  should  himself  be  inspired  as  well  as  the  sove- 
reign Pontiff. 

What  is  plainly  of  the  first  necessity  to  those  who  hold,  teach,  and 
disseminate  the  Scriptures  as  the  infallible  word  of  God,  is  a  clear,  in- 
telligible, Scriptural  definition  of  inspiration  as  the  act  of  God.  Next, 
the  application  of  the  doctrine  founded  on  such  definition,  to  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  sacred  text,  and  the  clearing  of  the  subject  in  all  its  re- 
lations from  the  blur  and  taint  of  human  speculation,  philosophy,  folly, 
and  corruption. 

There  is,  at  present,  as  manifested  to  the  public  eye  and  ear,  in  all 
quarters,  the  utmost  confusion  of  theories  and  definitions.  An  inspec- 
tion of  the  numerous  publications  which  have  issued  from  the  British 
press  since  the  philosophical  treatise  of  Mr.  Morell,  can  hardly  fail  to 
result  in  a  strong  conviction  that  the  purely  speculative,  idealistic,  and 
pantheistic  views  of  that  author  had,  in  some  instances,  wholly,  and  m 
others  partially,  modified  the  theories,  definitions,  illustrations,  dis- 
tinctions, use  of  terms,  and  conclusions  of  nearly  every  writer  who  has 
succeeded  him.  And  while  the  adorable  Head  of  the  Church,  "  whose 
word  that  goeth  forth  out  of  His  mouth,  shall  not  return  unto  Him 
void,  but  shall  accomplish  that  which  He  pleases,  and  shall  prosper  in 
the  thing  whereto  He  sends  it,"  is  directing  the  agencies  of  His  Provi- 
dence to  the  universal  diffusion  of  that  word  among  the  nations,  it  is 
not  unlikely  that  He  may  yet  subject  His  professing  people  in  the  com- 
munities where  the  Scriptures  have  long  been  a  common  inheritance, 
to  a  conflict  with  His  enemies,  concerning  the  inspiration,  infallibility, 
and  authority  of  those  sacred  oracles  which  will  demand  an  exhibition 
of  the  faith  of  martyrs. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAP.  I.    RECAPITULATION  OF  FACTS  AND  PRINCIPLES  WHICH  ARE 

INSISTED   ON    IN   THE    FORMER  VOLUME,         .  .  .13 

CHAP.  II.    WHAT  WAS  NOT,  AND  WHAT  WAS,  EFFECTED  BY  THE 
•  DIVINE  ACT  OF  INSPIRATION,  .        .        .        .33 

CHAP.  III.    OF  THE  MEDIATE  INSTRUMENTALITY  OF  LANGUAGE,        44 

CHAP.  IV.    REFERENCE  TO  AN  ARTICLE  IN  THE  "THE   BIBLIO- 

THECA  SACRA,"         .......     54 

CHAP.  V.    REFERENCE    TO   AN   ARTICLE    IN    "THE    PRINCETON 

REVIEW," 79 

CHAP.  VI.     INSTINCT,  INTUITION,  AND  INTELLECTUAL  ACTION  CON- 
SIDERED,   107 

1.  INSTINCT  AND  INTUITION  COMPARED  AND  DISTIN- 
GUISHED FROM  INTELLECTUAL  ACTION.    REFERENCE 

TO  "MILL'S  SYSTEM  OF  LOGIC,"      ....  107 

2.  SIR  WILLIAM  HAMILTON'S  "PHILOSOPHY  OF  COM- 
MON-SENSE," SHOWN  TO  AFFORD  NO  SUPPORT  TO  THE 

NOTION  OF  REVELATIONS  BEING  DISCOVERED  BY  IN- 
TUITION,         141 


CONTENTS. 

CHAP.  VII.  REVIEW  OF  PROFESSOR  LEE'S  "DISCOURSES  ON  INSPIRA- 
TION,"     ....«••  •  157 

1.  PRELIMINARY  STATEMENTS  AND  OBSERVATIONS,      .  157 

2.  THE  AUTHOR'S  THEME — His  THEORY — His  DEFIN- 
ITIONS,         ......  .  178 

3.  THE  MATTER  OF  HIS  DISCOURSES  —  THEIR  TEN- 
DENCY— HIS  INCONSISTENCIES — HIS  PARADOXES,      .  194 

4.  His  ILLUSTRATIONS  FROM  THE  FATHERS  —  FROM 
TRANCES  AND  ECSTASIES  —  WHAT  HE  ASCRIBES  TO 
THE  DlVINE,  AND  WHAT  TO  THE  HUMAN  ELEMENT  OF 
SCRIPTURE, 218 

6.  His  REASONS  FOR  REJECTING  THE  SO-CALLED 
"  MECHANICAL  THEORY  OF  INSPIRATION,".  .  .  255 

6.  His  HYPOTHETICAL  DISTINCTION  BETWEEN  REVELA* 
TION  AND  INSPIRATION,  IN  RESPECT  TO  THEIR  NA- 
TURE AND  THEIR  SOURCES HlS  ASSUMPTION  THAT 

THE  LOGOS  WITHDREW,  AT  OR  BEFORE  THE  DEATH  OF 
MOSES,  AS  TO  HIS  IMMEDIATE  PERSONAL  PRESENCE 
AND  AGENCY,  FROM  ALL  DIRECT  ACTION  AS  THEO- 
CRATIC RULER  AND  AS  REVEALER,  AND  THENCEFORTH 
ACTED  THROUGH  INTERMEDIATE  AGENCIES,  AND  ESPE- 
CIALLY THROUGH  AN  AGENCY  "GENERICALLY  DE- 
SCRIBED AS  THE  SPIRIT  OF  GOD" — BY  MEANS  OF 

WHICH  HlS   SUBSEQUENT   REVELATIONS  WERE  MADE,    253 

CHAP.  VIII.    CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS,  .        .        .  314 


CHAPTER  I. 

RECAPITULATION. 

IN  the  preceding  volume,  bearing  the  same  title  as 
the  present,  the  following  facts  and  principles  were  in- 
sisted on : 

That  a  revelation  from  God  was  originally  and  in- 
dispensably necessary  to  man. 

That  a  divine  revelation,  to  fulfill  its  purpose,  must 
be  made  in  the  ordinary  language,  styles,  and  idioms, 
of  its  recipients. 

That  it  is  according  to  man's  constitution,  a  law  of 
his  mind,  exemplified  in  his  experience  and  conscious- 
ness, that  he  thinks  in  words ;  that  he  conceives, 
receives  from  others,  is  conscious  of,  remembers,  and 
expresses,  thoughts,  only  in  words  and  signs  equiva- 
lent to  vocal  articulations  ;  that  words  and  intelligible 
signs  are  the  sole  medium  and  instrument  of  thought ; 
that  thoughts  are  conveyed  from  one  human  mind  to 
another  only  in  words  and  signs ;  and  accordingly, 
that,  in  conformity  to  man's  nature,  the  divine  thoughts 
were  conveyed  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers,  in 
words,  by  inspiration. 


14  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

That  inspiration  was  a  Divine  act,  exerted,  not  on 
the  faculties  of  the  sacred  penmen,  but  exerted  in  con- 
veying to  their  minds  the  thoughts  which  they  were  to 
express  in  writing. 

That  the  inspiration  of  thoughts  in  the  words  which 
were  to  be  written,  enabled  the  writers  intelligently 
and  infallibly  to  record  them  in  writing ;  so  that  the 
words  which  they  wrote,  being  the  very  words  by 
which  they  became,  by  inspiration,  conscious  of  the 
thoughts,  were  in  fact,  as  the  Scriptures  declare  them 
to  be,  the  words  of  God. 

That  what  the  sacred  penmen  wrote  was  inspired 
into  their  minds  in  the  language,  style,  and  idiom,  of 
the  respective  writers — because  they  understood,  and 
were  qualified  by  their  education  to  write  that  lan- 
guage in  the  style  to  which  they  were  respectively 
accustomed ;  because  their  readers  also  were  qualified 
to  understand  what  they  so  wrote  ;  and  because  when 
translated  into  the  like  phraseology  of  different  nations, 
what  they  wrote  would  be  level  to  the  capacity  of  the 
common  people  whose  thoughts  and  style  of  expres- 
sion, are,  for  the  most-  part,  essentially  alike. 

That  as  we  conceive  and  are  conscious  of  thoughts 
only  in  words,  so  our  words  necessarily  and  perfectly 
signify  and  express  the  thoughts  which  we  conceive  in 
them ;  since  all  that  we  are  conscious  of  in  thinking 
we  are  conscious  of  in  the  words  in  which  we  think. 

That  in  thinking  the  mind  selects  and  collocates  the 
words  in  which  we  are  conscious  of  our  thoughts,  and 
which  we  speak  or  write  when  we  express  our  thoughts 
to  others :  since  we  are  no  otherwise  conscious  of 
thoughts  than  of  the  words  in  that  succession  in  which 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  15 

we  write  or  vocally  express  them ;  and  since  the 
thought  conveyed  in  a  perfect  sentence  is  precisely 
that  thought  only  as  it  is  denned  and  qualified  by  the 
particular  words  employed  and  collocated  as  they  are 
when  the  sentence  is  written ;  so  that  to  conceive  a 
thought  in  words  is,  of  necessity,  to  conceive  it  in 
words  collocated  as  when  written,  so  as  perfectly  to 
express  it. 

That,  accordingly,  the  usus  loquendi,  the  exact  signi- 
fication, or  sense  in  which  words  are  used  in  the  con- 
nections, grammatical  forms  and  collocations  assigned 
to  them  in  sentences,  is  fixed  by  the  action  of  the  mind 
in  thinking,  so  that  the  rule  of  usage  is  predetermined 
by  the  intellectual  cogitative  act. 

That  language  is  not  a  product  of  human  ingenuity, 
but  a  primeval  gift  of  God,  essential  to  man's  exercise 
of  the  power  of  thought,  and  necessary  at  the  very 
dawn  of  his  existence. 

That  words  are  the  matrix,  vehicle,  instrument  of 
thought,  and  as  articulated  and  written,  are  represent- 
atives, not  of  things,  but  only  of  thoughts. 

That  words  are  as  perfect  a  medium  of  thought  as 
light  is  of  visual,  or  air  of  auricular  perception ;  and 
to  those  who  understand  and  use  them  alike,  they  per- 
fectly convey  the  thoughts  conceived  in  them  from  one 
mind  to  another. 

That  inspired  thoughts  as  expressed  in  the  words  of 
the  original  text  of  Scripture,  being  clearly  conceived 
in  those  words  by  a  translator,  and  as  clearly  conceived 
in  the  words  of  another  language,  may  be  as  clearly 
expressed  in  such  other  words  as  they  are  in  the  ori- 
ginal ;  and  the  inspired  thoughts  may  be  conveyed  to 


16  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

the  reader  of  the  translation,  as  perfectly  as  they  were 
conveyed  by  inspiration  to  the  sacred  writers,  and  as 
they  were  conveyed  to  the  readers  of  the  original  text : 
since  in  both  instances  equally,  the  words  perfectly 
express  and  are  the  correlates,  vehicles,  and  represent- 
atives of  the  thoughts  conceived  in  them  ;  and  since  it 
is  impossible  that  particular  thoughts  should  be  per- 
fectly conceived,  except  in  words  which  perfectly 
represent  and  express  them. 

That  the  words  of  the  original  text  of  Scripture, 
being  the  words  in  which  the  Divine  thoughts  were 
inspired  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers,  infallibly 
represent  those  thoughts,  and  are  as  infallible  as  the 
thoughts  are. 

That  the  words  of  Scripture  are  the  words  of  God, 
because  He  inspired  them  into  the  minds  of  those 
whom  He  appointed  to  write  them ;  they  are  the  in- 
fallible rule  of  faith,  because  they  express  the  thoughts 
which  He  inspired  in  them ;  and  they  are  immutable 
because  His  thoughts  change  not. 

That  while  all  the  words  of  Scripture,  whether  relat- 
ing to  original  revelations  or  to  matters  of  human 
experience  and  history,  were  inspired  into  the  minds 
of  the  sacred  writers,  the  doctrine  of  plenary  Divine 
Inspiration  does  not  imply  that  the  words  recorded  as 
having  been  spoken  by  wicked  men  and  evil  spirits 
were  divinely  inspired  into  the  minds  of  those  speakers, 
but  only  that,  in  order  to  the  words  of  those  speakers 
being  infallibly  recorded,  they  were  conveyed  to  the 
minds  of  the  sacred  writers  by  inspiration.  Job's 
friends  did  not  speak  by  inspiration ;  but  what  they 
said,  the  very  words  which  they  uttered,  were  inspired 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  17 

into  the  mind  of  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Job.  Satan 
did  not  speak  to  Eve  by  inspiration ;  but  what  he  said 
to  her  was  conveyed  to  Moses  by  inspiration,  to  be  by 
him  recorded  with  infallible  accuracy. 

In  our  view  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Divine  thoughts 
in  the  words  of  the  sacred  text,  the  Scriptures  are,  col- 
lectively, the  Word  of  God ;  and  as  such,  are  infallible 
and  endure  forever.  Every  doctrinal  truth  which  they 
reveal,  every  inspired  sentiment  which  they  utter,  and 
every  historical  fact  which  they  certify,  will  forever 
remain  immutable  as  originally  inspired  and  expressed 
— the  Word  of  God — the  Testimony  of  Jesus  Christ. 

The  Word  of  God,  as  recorded  in  the  Bible,  thus 
stands  out  as  the  verbal  expression  of  His  thoughts, 
His  will,  His  purposes,  and  His  acts ;  and  as  the  vehicle 
of  His  power  in  the  works  of  creation,  providence,  and 
grace,  and  the  intermediate  instrument  of  intellectual 
and  spiritual  intercourse  and  influence,  between  Him 
and  men  :  in  a  manner,  analogous,  in  respect  to  its 
externality,  its  mediate  instrumentality,  and  its  endur- 
ing existence,  to  the  Divine  Logos ;  the  personal  Word 
incarnate,  the  visible  Mediator;  a  chief  end  of  all 
whose  works  is  to  fulfill  what  the  written  word 
testifies  of  Him:  "For  of  Him,  and  to  Him,  and 
through  Him,  are  all  things ;  to  whom  be  glory  for- 
ever, amen."  The  created  intelligences  of  all  worlds 
are  to  see  and  be  conscious  that  every  word  of  Scrip- 
ture is  verified,  vindicated,  and  fulfilled  in  and  through 
Him.  By  Him  were  all  things  created,  that  unto  the 
principalities  and  powers  in  heavenly  places  might  be 
known,  by  His  administration  of  all  things  relatively 
to  the  Church,  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God,  accord- 


18  THE   PLENAKY  INSPIKATION 

ing  to  His  eternal  purpose  which  He  purposed  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord ;  which,  as  a  mystery,  was  re- 
vealed to  Paul  and  written  by  him.  (Eph.  3.) 
"  To  Him  every  knee  shall  bow;  of  those  in  heaven, 
and  those  on  earth,  and  those  under  the  earth ;  and 
every  tongue  shall  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord,  to 
the  glory  of  God  the  Father."  (Philippians  2.) 

In  carrying  out  His  comprehensive  scheme  of  agency 
and  manifestation,  with  reference  to  present  results, 
and  to  the  intelligence  and  homage  of  creatures  in  all 
future  time ;  and  in  administering  all  things  under  the 
ancient  economy  in  relation  to  His  redemptive  work, 
and  in  literal  conformity  to  his  inspired  word,  He 
assumed  a  theocratic  relation  to  His  covenant  people  ; 
and  exercised  His  peculiar  offices  and  prerogatives  as 
Mediatorial  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King.  Of  the  govern- 
ment which  He  instituted  over  the  children  of  Israel,  He 
was  the  Lawgiver  and  the  Head — the  chief  Magistrate 
• — the  King.  His  throne  was  the  mercy  seat — the  ark 
of  His  covenant — in  the  inner  and  secluded  precinct 
of  His  tabernacle.  But  being  invisibly,  though  per- 
sonally present,  He  signified  and  made  known  His 
presence  by  His  vocal  utterance  of  words — words  artic- 
ulated, heard,  understood,  and  often  responded  to  in 
the  same  sense  and  manner  as  the  words  addressed  by 
one  human  person  to  another.  In  that  ordinary  and 
accustomed  sense  His  words  were  received,  believed, 
and  relied  on  as  infallibly  conveying  His  meaning,  His 
thoughts,  promises,  testimonies. 

That  faith,  accordingly,  which,  as  the  instrument  in 
justification,  connects  the  soul  with  Christ,  is  belief  of 
the  testimony  which  the  Scriptures  express  concerning 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCiilPTUKES.  19 

Him.  It  is  realized  to  man's  consciousness  in  the 
words  of  Scripture.  It  is  believing  the  testimony  which 
God  has  given  in  the  words  inspired  by  Him ;  believ- 
ing it  on  His  authority,  and  because  He  has  spoken  it. 
"Words  are  the  vehicle  of  that  testimony.  The  act  is 
like  that  of  seeing,  of  which  light  is  the  medium. 

Among  the  things  which  specially  characterize  this 
testimony,  both  under  the  ancient  and  the  present  dis- 
pensation, are  those  which  relate  to  His  person,  as  con- 
stituted by  the  union  of  the  human  with  His  Divine 
nature  ;  and  those  which  relate  to  His  mediatorial  offi- 
ces and  works  as  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King.  These 
things  are  sometimes  expressed  separately;  often  in 
connection  with  each  other ;  and  all  of  them  are  more 
or  less  distinctly  implied  in  those  testimonies  which 
relate  expressly  to  the  shedding  of  His  blood — the  sac- 
rifice of  His  life — as  a  substitute  for  actual  transgres- 
sors, and  instead  of  directly  inflicting  on  them  the 
penalty  of  the  Law. 

These  things  are  testified  throughout  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures.  They  are  as  truly  the  basis  and 
essence  of  the  Patriarchal  and  Levitical  economies,  as 
of  the  Christian.  The  faith  through  which  the  pa- 
triarchs were  justified,  was  faith  in  them,  however  sum- 
marily and  briefly  they  may  be  expressed  in  the 
written  word ;  and  to  whatever  extent  they  may  be 
conveyed  in  the  forms  of  promise,  and  through  the 
instrumentality  of  types  and  ritual  observances.  Every 
statement,  promise,  representation,  implies — as  well  as 
those  which  directly  express  them — that  those  who  are 
said  to  believe  the  verbal  statements,  had  knowledge 
of  the  things  referred  to. 


20  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

Thus  tlie  faith  through  which  Abraham  was  justified, 
is  every  where  represented  as  an  implicit  unwavering  be- 
lief of  verbal  promises  of  God,  which  in  every  instance, 
expressed,  or  implied  and  involved,  those  testimonies 
concerning  Christ  as  Redeemer  and  Saviour,  which 
constitute  the  substance  of  the  Gospel.  On  the  promise 
being  announced  to  him  that,  contrary  to  all  human 
probability,  he  should  have  a  son,  and  a  numerous 
posterity,  he  believed  Jehovah,  and  He  counted  it  to 
him  for  righteousness ;  for  that  belief  included  faith  in 
Christ,  who  in  respect  to  His  human  nature,  was  to  be 
one  of  his  descendants,  and  preeminently  the  Seed  in 
whom  all  the  covenants  and  promises  centred.  By 
faith  Abraham,  when  he  was  tried,  offered  up  Isaac, 
the  son  who  had  been  promised,  and  through  whom 
the  other  promises  were  to  be  fulfilled;  accounting 
that  God  was  able  to  raise  him  up,  even  from  the  dead. 
He  believed  God,  who  quickeneth  the  dead ;  believed 
what  he  spoke  to  him,  solely  because  He  spoke  it ;  be- 
lieved it  as  His  word,  involving  His  infinite  authority 
and  prescience,  whether  command  or  promise,  and 
whether  more  or  less  comprehensive  and  expressive  of 
His  covenant  and  purpose  of  redemption  through  the 
mediation  and  sacrifice  of  Christ.  By  faith  Abel 
offered  unto  God  a  more  excellent  sacrifice  than  Cain, 
by  which  he  obtained  witness  that  he  was  righteous,  or 
justified ;  which  implies  that  he  believed  the  Divine 
testimonies  concerning  the  substitution  and  death  of 
Christ  for  the  redemption  of  sinners. 

Paul  writes  to  Timothy:  "Continue  thou  in  the 
things  which  thou  hast  learned,  and  hast  been  assured 
of;  knowing  of  whom  thou  hast  learned  them,  and  that 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCEIPTURES.  21 

from  a  child  tliou  liast  known  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto  salvation, 
through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  All  Scripture 
is  given  by  inspiration  of  God."  All  Scripture  is 
theopneustos,  God-inbreathed — inbreathed,  inspired,  of 
God.  Timothy  had  learned  of  God  by  His  inspired 
words  in  Scripture,  on  which  his  faith  was  founded. 

That  which  the  prophets  and  apostles  spoke  and 
wrote  in  their  official  character  was  regarded  by  their 
contemporaries,  as  being  not  theirs,  in  thought  or  lan- 
guage, but  as  being,  on  the  contrary,  the  words  of  God. 
The  distinction  between  true  and  false  prophets,  was 
that  the  fake  uttered  only  their  own  thoughts  and 
words,  and  the  true  only  the  thoughts  and  words  of 
God.  They  called  upon  their  auditors  to  hear  from 
them  the  words  of  God.  "  He  spake  by  the  mouth  of 
all  His  holy  prophets  since  the  world  began."  The 
apostles  "spake  the  word  of  God  with  boldness;" 
multitudes  came  together  to  "  hear  the  wtxrd  of  the 
Lord  from  them."  (Acts  4.)  Peter  refers  to  all  the 
epistles  of  Paul  as  Scriptures,  which  "the  unlearned 
and  unstable  wrest,  as  they  do  also  the  other  Scriptures, 
unto  their  own  destruction." 

Such  faith  rests  on  the  words  of  Scripture  as  used 
in  their  grammatical  sense  and  connection  in  sentences. 
The  reason  why  the  rules  of  grammar  are  the  true  and 
fitting  rules  of  construing  and  interpreting  sentences, 
is  not  that  they  are  rules  devised  by  grammarians  for 
that  purpose,  but  that  they  are  inherent  in  language 
itself — being  founded  in  the  conception  of  thoughts  in 
words.  Words  jointly  with  the  thoughts  which  they 
express,  are  conceived  in  their  due  grammatical  forms 


22  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

and  relations.  The  parts  of  speech  necessary  to  the 
perfect  consciousness  and  expression  of  our  thoughts 
are  conceived  in  the  forms  which  underlie  and  imply 
the  rules  of  grammar.  This  occurs  spontaneously. 
No  one  in  consciously  conceiving  thoughts  in  words 
has  any  conscious  reference  to  the  rules  of  grammar, 
any  more  than  a  skillful  performer  while  rapidly  touch- 
ing the  right  keys  of  his  instrument,  so  as  to  perform 
correctly  the  tune  which  he  wills  to  play,  has  a  con- 
scious reference  to  the  rules  of  musical  composition. 
Of  the  action  of  the  soul  in  thinking — complex,  effect- 
ive, and  inconceivably  rapid  as  it  may  be — we  are  not 
conscious.  We  are  conscious  only  of  the  effects,  in  our 
conceptions  of  thoughts  in  words.  We  infer  the  action 
from  the  effects.  And  as  we  are  alike  conscious  of  the 
words  and  thoughts,  which  indeed  are  to  our  conscious- 
ness identical,  we  as  justly  ascribe  to  that  action  the 
production  of  the  words  in  the  requisite  forms  and  col- 
locations, %s  the  thoughts  which  are  their  correlates. 
Those  words  in  those  forms  and  relations,  perfectly 
echo,  represent,  and  express  the  thoughts  conceived  in 
them,  which  is  the  same  as  to  say  that  they  grammati- 
cally express  those  thoughts. 

If  we  did  not  think  grammatically,  by  a  necessity 
like  that  by  which  we  see  and  distinguish  the  same 
objects  with  unerring  certainty  at  different  times,  and 
hear  and  distinguish  the  same  sounds  at  successive 
periods  under  like  conditions,  then  no  formal  rules  of 
grammar  could  possibly  enable  us  to  adjust  our  words 
so  as  perfectly  to  express  our  thoughts.  If  our  thoughts 
as  we  originally  and  naturally  conceive  them,  were  not, 
in  respect  to  their  arrangement  and  relations,  conform- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  23 

able  to  the  true  rules  of  grammar,  tlien  it  would  be 
impossible  to  adjust  our  words  to  them  by  the  artificial 
verbal  rules  of  grammar.  Words  are  the  servants,  in- 
struments, vehicles,  echoes,  expressions  of  thoughts. 
In  the  order  of  nature,  thoughts  have  the  precedence. 
If  the  thoughts  are  not  necessarily  grammatical — if 
the  words  are  subject  to  grammatical  rules  independ- 
ently of  the  thoughts — then  there  is  no  necessary  or 
immutable  relation  between  them,  and  no  ground  of 
certainty  that  a  grammatical  arrangement  of  the  words 
of  a  sentence  will  perfectly  express  the  thoughts  as  they 
were  conceived  and  are  intended  to  be  conveyed.  But 
if  we  think  grammatically,  and  think  in  words,  then 
the  rules  of  grammar  are  founded  in  the  action  of  the 
soul  in  thinking. 

It  is  apparent,  therefore,  that  to  expound  the  lan- 
guage of  a  sentence,  so  as  to  exhibit  the  thoughts  in- 
tended to  be  expressed  by  it,  is  to  exhibit  the  thoughts 
of  the  author  as  he  conceived  and  arranged  them  in  his 
words,  that  is,  in  conformity  to  the  true  rules  of  gram- 
mar. The  expositor,  therefore,  must  understand  the 
words  as  the  author  did,  and  must  conceive  the  thoughts 
in  those  words  as  the  author  conceived  them.  When 
he  so  conceives  the  thoughts,  the  grammatical  rules  may, 
if  correct,  assist,  and  can  not  mislead  or  embarrass  him. 

This  grammatical  conception  of  thoughts  in  words, 
is,  in  like  manner,  the  prerequisite  and  basis  of  the 
usus  loquendi — the  ground  of  legitimate  and  authoritive 
usage.  Those  who  conceive  the  same  thoughts,  equally 
conceive,  and  when  not  misled  by  education,  or  biased 
by  vicious  example,  express  them  conformably  to  the 
rules  of  grammar.  The  particular  words  to  be  used, 


24  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

and  in  the  forms  in  which  they  are  to  be  used,  are 
necessitated  and  determined  in  the  conception  of  the 
simple,  modified,  or  complex  thoughts  to  be  expressed. 
The  mind  in  willing  to  think  or  to  conceive  particular 
thoughts,  has,  in  its  primary  action,  equal  scope  and 
freedom,  in  respect  to  the  thoughts  and  words,  the 
thoughts  and  words  being  conceived  together. 

But  after  conceiving  particular  thoughts  in  fitting 
and  answerable  words,  the  mind  may,  by  reflection, 
review  its  thoughts,  and  revise  the  words  in  which  they 
were  originally  conceived,  and  may  conceive  the  same 
thoughts  in  other  words,  doing  in  effect  what  a  trans- 
lator from  one  language  into  another  does.  This  pro- 
cess opens  the  door  of  influence  from  the  imagination, 
and  the  feelings,  emotions,  and  passions  ;  and  is  modi- 
fied by  rhetorical  rules,  literary  tastes,  and  a  thousand 
extraneous  causes  by  which  the  power  of  conception  is 
baffled  and  enervated,  the  intellect  is  rendered  feeble, 
indecisive,  and  confused,  and  the  thoughts  dressed  in  an 
artificial  garb,  are  lost,  or  rendered  pointless.  No  man 
should  speak  or  write  without  such  knowledge  of  what 
he  intends  to  say,  as  to  enable  him  to  conceive  his 
thoughts  at  first  in  the  words  in  which  he  ought  once 
for  all  to  express  them. 

The  foregoing  observations  respecting  the  gram- 
matical conception  of  thoughts,  pre-suppose  that  the 
exercise  of  the  power  of  thought  is  acquired  by  edu- 
cation, example,  vocal  and  literary  instruction,  hearing 
and  reading  the  words  of  those  who  speak  and  write 
grammatically,  so  that  the  natural  capacity  and  tend- 
ency of  the  mind  to  conceive  thoughts  in  their  due 
orderly  succession,  shall  not  be  thwarted  and  perverted 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  25 

by  the  force  of  erroneous  teaching  and  example.  At 
the  same  time  these  observations  may  serve  to  confirm 
and  illustrate  the  fact  that  the  natural  or  constitutional 
laws  of  intellectual  action,  the  laws  of  thought,  were 
not  infringed  or  deviated  from,  by  the  inspiration  of  the 
divine  thoughts  and  words  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred 
writers,  but  were  strictly  conformed  to,  the  thoughts 
being  inspired  in  the  words  and  idioms  in  which  the 
writers  would  naturally  conceive  them. 

The  primary  error  which  pervades  the  treatises  of 
those  who  believe  in  any  Divine  Inspiration,  is  that  of 
regarding  the  inspiration  as  an  influence  on  the  mental 
faculties  of  the  sacred  writers  ;  some  regarding  it  as  en- 
lightening, exciting,  assisting,  and  guiding ;  others  as 
guiding  them  in  the  exercise  of  their  faculties,  but  not 
otherwise  affecting  them — as  rendering  them  infallible 
in  what  they  spoke  or  wrote,  but  not  rendering  them 
omniscient;  preserving  them  from  asserting  error,  but 
not  enabling  them  either  to  know  or  to  remember  all 
things.  The  fact  of  such  a  guidance  is,  we  apprehend 
no  where  taught  in  Scripture  as  a  constituent  of  inspira- 
tion ;  the  mode  of  it  is,  we  think,  inconceivable.  In- 
spiration, according  to  the  Scriptures,  imports  no  more 
nor  less  than  inbreathing,  imparting,  conveying,  into 
the  minds  of  the  writers,  exactly,  in  thought  and  lan- 
guage, what  they  were  to  write.  What  they  wrote, 
therefore,  was  infallible,  solely  because  it  was  just  what 
was  given  them  by  inspiration.  It  was  no  more  neces- 
sary that  the  men  should  be  rendered  infallible  or  om- 
niscient, in  order  to  their  receiving  what  was  conveyed 
to  them  by  inspiration,  than  in  order  to  their  receiving 
and  uttering  correctly  what  was  expressed  to  them  by 

2 


26  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

their  fellow-men.  Undoubtedly  they  were  moved  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  to  speak  and  write  correctly,  and  with- 
out defect  or  mistake,  just  what  they  received  by  in- 
spiration. But  that  moving  of  them  was  not  of  the 
nature  of  inspiration.  They  were  not  moved  to  receive, 
discover,  or  remember  what  they  were  to  write,  but  to 
write  what  they  had  received  and  were  conscious  of  by 
inspiration. 

The  difficulties,  accordingly,  which  are  sought  to  be 
obviated  by  a  notion  of  guidance,  or  an  influence  on 
their  faculties,  are  founded  in  a  misconception  of  the 
nature  and  effect  of  inspiration.  If  they  actually  re- 
ceived from  God  just  what  they  were  to  write,  and 
actually  wrote  just  what  they  received,  then  the  diffi- 
culties in  question  are  merely  imaginary.  That  they 
did  so  receive  and  write  just  what  was  given  them  by 
inspiration  of  God,  the  Scriptures  themselves  clearly 
testify,  and  also  that  they  were  moved  to  utter  just 
what  they  received  ;  and  on  this  ground  it  is  that  their 
writings  claim  to  be  the  infallible  word  of  God. 

But  on  supposition  that  they  did  not  receive  from  God 
by  inspiration  the  thoughts  and  words  which  they  were 
to  utter  by  writing,  or  did  not  utter  just  the  thoughts 
and  words  which  they  received,  then,  though  a  man 
may  believe  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  infallible  word 
of  God,  he  can  give  to  other  men  no  scriptural  or  other 
conclusive  evidence  that  they  are  infallibly  His  Word. 
He  may  say  that  the  writers  were  rendered  infallible 
in  what  they  wrote ;  that  they  were  rendered  infallible 
in  discerning  the  thoughts  to  be  expressed,  and*  in  se- 
lecting the  proper  words ;  that  they  were  infallibly 
guided,  preserved  from  error,  and  the  like ;  and  he  may 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  27 

confidently  and  sincerely  think  so  :  such  is  his  opinion, 
derived,  it  may  be,  as  a  necessary  inference,  from  the 
doctrines  which  he  believes  the  Scriptures  to  contain, 
or  from  his  belief  of  the  Divine  authority  and  infallible 
truth  of  those  doctrines  ;  but  such  belief  and  opinion 
constitute  no  evidence  either  to  him  or  to  other  men, 
that  it  was  inspiration,  or  any  thing  which  Scripture 
or  philology  define  as  inspiration,  that  so  guided  the 
sacred  writers,  and  rendered  them  infallible.  If  there 
are  certain  truths  of  Scripture  which  man  could  not 
discover,  but  the  belief  of  which,  on  the  authority  of 
God,  is  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation,  doubtless  he 
that  believes  them  and  is  conscious  of  that  which  con- 
stitutes salvation,  may  infer  with  undoubting  confi- 
dence that  the  Scripture  which  records  them  is  the  in- 
fallible Word  of  God.  But  how  shall  that  serve  to 
convince  those  who  have  not  so  believed,  those  who 
are  ignorant,  those  who  have  been  erroneously  in- 
structed, those  who  have  been  deceived,  bewildered, 
and  misled  ?  If  they  are  to  be  convinced  it  must  be 
by  other  means  than  the  opinions,  experience,  or  testi- 
mony of  men.  They  may  be  convinced  by  their  own 
examination,  and  by  testimony  that  the  Scriptures  ex- 
hibit many  truths  which  no  man  can  possibly  discover 
of  himself;  but  that  may  be  far  from  satisfying  them 
that  those  truths  as  expressed  in  Scripture  are  the  in- 
fallible, immutable  word  of  God,  and  that  every  thing 
in  Scripture  alike  involves  His  authority,  and  is  part 
and  parcel  of  the  unalterable  rule  of  faith  and  life  on 
which  his  everlasting  destiny  depends.  He  may  be 
staggered  and  confounded  by  the  objections,  criticisms, 
and  arguments,  addressed  to  his  reason,  by  skeptical 


28  THE   PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

philosophers  and  theorists.  And  if  any  thing  is  ad- 
dressed to  his  reason  to  rectify  his  convictions,  it  must 
be  of  a  nature  to  obviate  those  objections. 

~No  man  who  pretends  to  believe  any  thing  upon  any 
kind  of  evidence,  has  any  difficulty  in  admitting  that 
those  truths  of  Scripture  which  it  was  impossible  for 
man  to  discover,  were  attained  by  some  kind  of  inspira- 
tion. The  great  question  is :  What  was  the  nature  of 
that  inspiration  ?  If  it  was  the  act  of  God,  conveying 
His  thoughts  in  words  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred 
writers,  then  there  is  no  room  for  doubt  but  that  the 
words  of  Scripture  are  the  infallible  words  of  God.  If 
He  inspired  those  words  into  their  minds,  then  they 
are  His  words.  If  it  is  the  nature  of  inspiration  to 
communicate  thoughts,  then  it  is  its  nature  to  commu- 
nicate words,  for  thoughts  are  conveyed  from  without 
to  the  human  mind  in  its  intelligently  conscious  state, 
only  in  words  and  signs  of  equivalent  significance. 

This,  which  we  take  to  be  the  only  Divine  inspira- 
tion, the  only  inspiration  claimed  and  asserted  by  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  is  'the  act  of  God  ;  and  is  not  less  dis- 
tinct from  any  act  or  agency  of  man,  than  is  the  act  of 
creation,  or  the  act  of  breathing  into  man  the  breath 
of  life.  But  if  those  who  discuss  the  origin  of  the 
Scriptures,  the  source  of  their  language,  their  infalli- 
bility, their  peculiarity  of  styles,  may,  in  place  of  this 
inspiration,  substitute  something  else ;  something,  any 
thing,  to  suit  their  particular  theory ;  an  impersonal, 
indefinable,  incomprehensible  influence  on  man's  facul- 
ties ;  a  power  of  spiritual  intuition  ;  a  guidance  which 
wholly  supersedes  discretion  and  volition,  and  is  equiv- 
alent to  a  gift  of  omniscience ;  a  combination  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  29 

amalgamation   of  Divine   and   human   agency  in  the 
same  acts  :  in  a  word,  if  the  theories  and  speculations 
of  rationalists,  idealists,  and  pantheists,  may  be  taken 
as  guides,  we  may  justly  expect  a  continued  harvest  of 
corresponding  fruits.     On  the  one  system,   the  diffi- 
culties referred  to,  which  relate  to  the  Divine  authority 
and  infallibility  of  all  the  words  and  sentences  of  Scrip- 
ture, are  wholly  superseded.     On  the  other,  they  are 
confirmed,  aggravated,  and  multiplied.     If  Grod  alone 
determined  what  should  be  written  on  His  authority, 
as  His  word,  and  as  the  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  life, 
and  if  He  inspired  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred  penmen 
what  He  required  to  be  written,  and  moved  them  to 
write  it ;    if  this  is  clearly  taught  in  the  Scriptures 
themselves,  and  is  clearly  consonant  to  man's  exigen- 
cies, capacities,  manner  of  receiving  intelligence  from 
without,  and  mode  of  intellectual  action,  thought,  and 
consciousness,  then  we  are  warranted  and  bound  to 
receive  the  Scriptures  entire  as  the  inspired,  expressed, 
infallible  word  of  Grod ;  and  it  behooves  all  men,  one  as 
much  as  another,  the  learned  as  much  as  the  ignorant, 
to  impute,  whatever  in  them  he  does  not  comprehend 
or  see  the  reason  of,  to  his  own  ignorance,  blindness, 
and  incompetency.     On  this  view,  no  man  can,  with 
any  more  consistency,  reason,  or  conviction,  refuse  so 
to  receive  and  believe  the  Scriptures,  than  he  can  re- 
fuse to  believe  his  own  existence,  or  the  phenomena 
of  his  senses,  until  he  fully  comprehends  all  that  they 
involve  and  imply.     We  have  in  fact  no  higher  evi- 
dence on  which  to  believe  that  God  created  and  gov- 
erns the  world,    than   we  have  to  believe  that  He 
appointed  a  succession  of  holy  men  to  receive  by  in- 


30  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

spiration  from  Him,  and  commit  to  writing  in  His 
name,  and  on  His  authority,  the  successive  portions  of 
the  sacred  Scriptures. 

Now  if  God  alone  determined  what  should  be  written 
on  His  authority  as  Holy  Scripture,  and  inspired  into 
the  minds  of  the  sacred  penmen  the  thoughts  in  the 
words  which  He  intended  they  should  write,  then  the 
actual  existence  of  any  one  of  the  sentences  of  Scripture 
is  as  much  and  for  the  same  reason,  as  that  of  any 
other,  to  be  referred  to  this  determination  and  inspira- 
tion ;  and  there  is  no  more  ground  of  stumbling  at  the 
occurrence  of  one  passage,  than  at  the  occurrence  of 
any  other.  If  His  object  and  purpose,  in  giving  the 
Scriptures  by  His  inspiration,  was  such  as  to  require 
all  that  variety  of  matter  which  the  Scriptures  actually 
contain — revelations,  which  it  was  impossible  for  man 
to  discover,  concerning  Himself;  His  acts  as  Creator, 
Kuler,  and  Eedeemer;  His  purposes,  counsels,  and 
covenants ;  His  perfections  and  relations ;  His  laws 
and  providence ;  His  vocal  utterances ;  and  His  con- 
veyance of  thoughts  by  inspiration :  and  on  the  other 
hand,  all  that  they  contain  concerning  man :  his  na- 
ture, relations,  and  responsibilities ;  his  conduct,  his 
apostasy,  his  repentance  and  salvation,  or  the  contrary ; 
his  experience,  socially  and  as  an  individual ;  the 
biography,  life,  character,  conduct,  sentiments,  beliefs, 
thoughts,  purposes,  motives,  experience,  death,  and 
destiny,  of  individuals ;  the  rise,  history,  decline  and 
extinction  of  families,  tribes,  nations,  dynasties ;  and 
if  it  was  necessary  that  this  variety  of  matter,  for 
chronological,  moral,  or  any  other  reasons,  should  be 
intimately  and  homogeneously  connected  and  inter- 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  31 

mingled,  then  there  can  be  nothing  more  incongruous 
or  improbable  in  the  inspiration  and  committing  to 
writing  of  any  one  portion  than  of  any  other.  If  the 
Divine  wisdom  determined  that  the  very  words  uttered 
by  Satan,  through  the  serpent,  to  Eve,  should  be  re- 
corded, so  that  the  manner  of  the  temptation  and  fall 
of  man,  might  be  infallibly  known  to  the  whole  race 
upon  whom  the  consequences  fall;  then  it  is  plain  that 
He  may,  and  if  the  narrative  is  true,  must  have  con- 
veyed the  identical  words  of  the  Hebrew  text  to  Moses 
by  inspiration — inbreathing  them  into  his  mind.  For 
in  no  other  way  is  it  possible  to  conceive  that  Moses 
could  have  infallibly  known  what  words  were  uttered 
by  Satan,  or  by  either  of  the  other  speakers  in  that 
scene.  If  what  was  uttered  by  Joseph's  brethren,  in 
their  conspiracy  against  him,  should  be  recorded  in 
Scripture  in  connection  with  the  other  facts  of  his  his- 
tory ;  that  the  conversation  between  Ahab  and  Jezebel 
concerning  Naboth's  vineyard,  and  a  copy  of  the  letters 
which  she  wrote  in  his  name,  should  be  recorded  ver- 
batim, as  connected  with  the  sequel  of  his  history; 
that  the  private  actions,  opinions,  expressions,  designs, 
wishes,  disappointments,  sins,  negligences,  ignorance, 
of  rulers  and  subjects,  of  prophets,  and  of  sacred  writers 
themselves,  should  in  like  manner  be  recorded ;  these 
and  scores  of  similar  instances,  afford  no  more  ground 
of  objection  to  the  words  of  the  record  having  been 
expressly  inspired  into  their  minds  to  be  written  in  the 
Sacred  Scriptures,  than  direct  revelations,  predictions, 
or  any  other  passages  afford.  The  question  is  not  as 
to  the  matter  of  the  record.  That  was  divinely  pre- 
determined. The  question  is  as  to  how  that  record 


32  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

came  to  be  written  by  the  authority  and  as  the  words 
of  God ;  and  if  any  of  the  words  of  Scripture  were 
given  to  the  prophets  by  inspiration  of  God,  in  order 
to  their  being  recorded  in  His  name  and  on  His  infalli- 
ble authority,  it  must  have  been  for  reasons  and  from 
a  necessity,  equally  applicable  to  them  all ;  and  ac- 
cordingly the  Scriptures  themselves  make  no  exception, 
but  declare  that  all  that  was  written  as  His  word,  was 
given  by  inspiration  of  God. 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  33 


CHAPTER    II. 

WHAT  WAS  NOT,  AND  WHAT  WAS,   EFFECTED   BY   THE 
DIVINE   ACT   OF   INSPIRATION. 

FROM  our  view  of  the  nature  of  inspiration  the  effects 
produced  by  it  are  rendered  obvious,  and  may  be  ex- 
plicitly stated ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  effects  which 
those  who  deny  the  doctrine  of  plenary  inspiration 
imagine  to  be  necessary  consequences  of  that  doctrine, 
may  be  specified  as  not  pertaining  to  it.  This  imputed 
class  of  effects  behooves  to  be  first  noticed. 

1.  The  Divine  act  of  inspiration  did  not  change,  or 
in  any  way  affect  the  moral  character  of  the  prophets, 
apostles,  or  other  subjects  of  it.     Holy  men  were  not 
made  such  by  that  act.     Unholy  men,  as  Balaam  and 
Caiaphas,  who  uttered  what  was  conveyed  into  their 
minds  by  Divine  inspiration,  were  not  thereby  rendered 
holy. 

2.  It  did  not   add  to,  or  affect  their  intelligence, 
knowledge,  judgment,    or    consciousness,    concerning 
matters  of  ordinary  experience,  scientific  truths,  or  any 
thing,  except  the  thoughts   and   words   which   were 
divinely  inspired  into  their  minds  to  be  spoken  or 
written  by  them.     It  did  not  remove  their  ignorance, 
or  rectify  their  erroneous  opinions  concerning  astrono- 

2* 


34  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

my,  geography,  history,  or  any  other  branch  of  secular 
knowledge.  Beyond  what  was  conveyed  to  them  by 
inspiration,  they  remained,  as  men,  in  every  respect  as 
ignorant  and  as  liable  to  err,  as  they  were  before. 

3.  It  did  not  render  them  infallible  in  respect  to  any 
thing,  except  in  receiving  and  delivering  what  was  in- 
spired— inbreathed — into   their  minds.      They   spake 
and  wrote  what  they  were  moved,  and  as  they  were 
moved,  by  the  Holy  Grhost,  to  speak  and  write.     The 
Spirit  spake  in  them  and  by  them.     They  received  by 
inspiration,  and  officially  spoke  and  wrote  only  the 
infallible  word  of  God.     Apart  from  their  reception 
and  expression  of  what  was  so  inspired,  they  remained 
as  fallible  as  other  men. 

4.  It  did  not  affect  their  individual  peculiarities,  as 
thinkers,  reasoners,  and  writers,  or  in  respect  to  the 
language,  style,  and  idioms,  to  which,  by  education 
and  habit,   they   were  accustomed.     As   the  Divine 
thoughts  were  conveyed  into  their  minds  in  words, 
they  were  of  necessity  conveyed  in  words  and  idioms 
with  which  they  were  familiar,  of  which  they  under- 
stood the  usage  and  signification,  and  which  they  were 
qualified  by  education  to  speak  and  write,  just  as  when 
Jehovah  spoke  audibly  to  the  children  of  Israel,  and 
to  the  prophets,  He  spoke  in  words,  styles,  and  idioms, 
which  they  understood,  and  with  which   they  were 
familiar. 

5.  It  did  not  suspend  or  counteract  any  law,  faculty, 
•or  function  of  their  minds,  nor  impair  their  intelligent 
and  conscious  self-control.     It  did  not  contravene,  dis- 
turb, or  interfere  with,  the  exercise  of  any  of  their 
faculties.     Their  reception  of  the  thoughts  conveyed 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  35 

by  Divine  inspiration,  affected  their  understandings  in 
no  degree  differently  from  their  reception  of  thoughts 
vocally  expressed  to  them  by  their  fellow-men.  They 
were  not  subjected  to  a  state  of  ecstasy  on  the  one  hand, 
nor  to  a  state  of  unconsciousness  on  the  other.  They 
spoke  and  wrote  what  was  conveyed  to  them  by  in- 
spiration, just  as  they  and  their  contemporaries  and  all 
men,  acting  rationally  and  freely,  speak  and  write 
what  they  receive  from  each  other.  The  only  pecu- 
liarity discoverable  in  their  case  relates  to  the  source 
of  what  was  conveyed  into  their  minds,  and  the  mode 
in  which  it  was  conveyed. 

6.  It  was  not  clairvoyance,  spiritual  intuition,  plenary 
knowledge,  or  elevation  of  religious  consciousness.     It 
was  not  a  mode  of  exercise  of  the  human  faculties.     It 
was  not  a  Divine  influence  on  any  of  the  faculties  of 
man ;  but  a  Divine  act  conveying  thoughts  to  the  minds 
of  the  sacred  writers,  and  through  them,  as  the  organs 
of  communication,  publishing  them  to  their  hearers  and 
readers. 

7.  It  was  not  a  proper  miracle.     It  was  supernatural, 
but   not   contra-natural.      It    neither   suspended    nor 
counteracted  any  of  their  mental  faculties,  but  was  in 
conformity  with  the  natural  laws  and  ordinary  opera- 
tions of  their  minds. 

On  the  other  hand : 

1.  The    Divine    act    of   inspiration    conveyed    the 
thoughts,  which  the  Scriptures  express,  to  the  minds 
of  the  sacred  writers — to  their  understandings — to  their 
intelligent  consciousness. 

2.  It  conveyed  those  thoughts  in  words — in  the 
words  which  they  were  at  the  same  time  moved  to 


36  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

speak  and  write.  The  Spirit  spake  by  them.  His 
word  was  on  their  tongue.  The  Word  of  the  Lord 
came  unto  them — was  inspired  into  their  minds — came 
audibly  or  in  a  manner  equivalent  to  distinct  vocal 
utterance — came  saying,  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  hear  the 
word  of  the  Lord — came  either  with  an  express  com- 
mand, or  from  their  official  relation,  an  implied  com- 
mand, to  them  to  proclaim  or  write  it. 

It  was  a  rule  binding  on  the  prophets,  to  speak  the 
very  words  of  God  that  were  inspired  into  their  minds, 
"  The  prophet  that  hath  my  word,  let  him  speak  my 
word  faithfully."  (Jer.  23.)  To  speak  any  other  than 
the  words  of  God,  was  the  mark  of  a  false  pretender  to 
the  prophetic  office.  Hence  it  is  said  of  the  false 
prophets :  "  They  speak  a  vision  of  their  own  hearts, 
and  not  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord."  .  .  .  Again : 
"  I  have  not  sent  these  prophets,  yet  they  ran  ;  I  have 

not  spoken  to  them,  yet  they  prophesied I  have 

heard  what  the  prophets  said,  that  prophesy  lies  in  my 
name,  saying,  I  have  dreamed,  I  have  dreamed  .... 
they  are  prophets  of  the  deceit  of  their  own  heart." 
(Jer.  23.)  Moses  told  the  people  "  all  the  words  of  the 
Lord,  and  wrote  all  the  words  of  the  Iprd."  (Ex.  24.) 
"  Samuel  told  all  the  words  of  the  Lord  unto  the  people 
that  asked  of  him  a  king."  (1  Sam.  8.)  "  This  word 
came  from  the  Lord  to  Jeremiah,  saying :  Thus  saith 
the  Lord :  stand  in  the  court  of  the  Lord's  house  and 
speak  ...  all  the  words  that  I  command  thee  to  speak ; 
diminish  not  a  ^uord"  (Chap.  26.)  "  The  word  that 
came  to  Jeremiah  from  the  Lord,  saying :  Thus  speak- 
eth  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  saying,  Write  thee  all  the 
words  that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee  in  a  book." 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  37 

.  .  .  Again :  "  These  are  the  words  that  the  Lord  spake 
concerning  Israel  and  concerning  Judah."  (Chap.  30.) 
"  This  word  came  unto  Jeremiah  from  the  Lord,  say- 
ing :  Take  thee  a  roll  of  a  book,  and  write  therein  all 
the  words  that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee  against  Israel 

and  against  all  the  nations Then  Jeremiah  called 

Baruch,  the  Scribe,  and  Baruch  wrote  from  the  mouth 
of  Jeremiah  all  the  words  of  the  Lord,  which  he  had 
spoken  unto  him,  upon  a  roll  of  a  book.  And  Jere- 
miah, being  confined  in  prison,  commanded  Baruch, 
saying  :  Go  thou  and  read  in  the  roll,  which  thou  hast 
written  from  my  mouth,  the  words  of  the  Lord  in  the  ears 
of  the  people  in  the  Lord's  house.  And  Baruch  .  .  . 
did  according  to  all  that  Jeremiah  the  prophet  com- 
manded him,  reading  in  the  book  the  words  of  the  Lord, 
in  the  Lord's  house.  The  princes  .  .  asked  Baruch, 
saying,  Tell  us  now,  how  didst  thou  write  all  these 
words  at  his  mouth  ?  Then  Baruch  answered  them, 
He  pronounced  all  'these  words  unto  me  with  his  mouth, 
and  I  wrote  them  with  ink  in  the  book."  (Jer.  36.) 
The  controversy  between  the  apostate  Jews  and  Jere- 
miah, turned  on  the  question,  Whether  the  words  which 
he  spoke  and  wrote  in  his  official  character  as  prophet, 
were  the  words  of  Jehovah,  or  his  own  words  ? 

Jehovah  said  to  Isaiah :  "I  have  put  my  words  in 
thy  mouth."  (Chap.  51.)  To  Jeremiah  :  "I  have  put 
my  words  in  thy  mouth."  (Chap.  1.)  To  Ezekiel : 
"  Thou  shalt  speak  my  words  unto  them."  (Chap.  2.) 
Again :  "  All  my  words  that  I  shall  speak  unto  thee 
receive  in  thine  heart,  and  hear  with  thine  ears." 
(Chap.  3.)  Not  only  is  that  which  was  conveyed  to  the 
sacred  writers  from  God,  by  inspiration,  characterized 


38  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

in  the  foregoing,  and  many  similar  passages  throughout 
the  Scriptures,  as  the  veritable  words  of  God — His 
thoughts  in  His  words — but  it  is  evident  that  His 
thoughts  could  not  be  conveyed  to  them  apart  from 
words,  consistently  with  their  retaining  the  ordinary 
exercise  of  their  faculties,  so  as  intelligently  to  under- 
stand, and  express  them  vocally  and  in  writing.  For 
in  the  natural  state  and  exercise  of  his  faculties,  man 
thinks  in  words,  and  receives  thoughts  from  external 
sources,  intellectually  conceives  thoughts,  is  conscious 
of,  remembers,  and  expresses  them,  only  in  words  and 
signs  equivalent  to  vocal  articulations.  To  suppose 
thoughts  to  be  inspired  into  his  mind  without  words, 
therefore,  would  be  to  suppose  that,  in  receiving  them, 
he  did  not  retain  the  ordinary  use  of  his  faculties ; 
whereas  the  sacred  writers,  when  receiving  inspirations, 
undoubtedly  did  retain  the  natural  and  accustomed  use 
of  their  mental  faculties  as  perfectly  as  when  receiving 
communications  from  their  fellow-men,  or  when  con- 
ceiving and  expressing  thoughts  conceived  in  their  own 
minds. 

Moreover,  if  thoughts  were  inspired  into  the  minds 
of  the  sacred  writers,  they  must  have  been  inspired  in 
words,  because  it  is  impossible  for  man  to  determine  or 
understand  what  a  particular  thought  is,  unless  he 
knows  and  understands  the  words  which  are  employed 
to  express  it.  He  can  not  be  conscious  of  the  though^ 
without  the  words ;  and  if  he  is  not  conscious  of  the 
thought,  he  can  not  select  words  to  express  it,  any 
more  than  he  can  select  musical  notes  to  constitute  a 
particular  tune,  of  which  he  has  no  conscious  know- 
ledge, or  arithmetical  figures  to  solve  a  problem  of 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTURES.  39 

which  lie  knows  only  the  name.  A  thought  requires 
certain  words,  in  a  certain  orderly  succession,  perfectly 
to  express  it.  Those  words  in  that  succession  define, 
limit,  qualify  the  thought.  Other  words,  or  a  different 
succession,  will  not  perfectly  express  it.  A  perfect  re- 
ception or  conception  of  the  thought,  therefore,  can  not 
take  place  in  the  human  mind  without  the  words  by 
which  it  is  expressed.  To  conceive  a  thought  is  to 
conceive  it  precisely  as  it  is  to  the  consciousness  when 
expressed  in  words,  which  can  not  be  distinguished 
from  conceiving  it  in  words. 

3.  The  Divine  act  of  inspiration,  rendered  the  sacred 
writers  infallible  in  respect  to  what  they  received,  and 
wrote  in  their  official  character.  What  they  received 
they  wrote.  What  they  received  was  the  infallible 
word  of  God.  What  they  wrote,  therefore,  was  His 
infallible  word.  They  had  no  discretion  in  the  case. 
Though  intelligent  and  voluntary  in  speaking  and  writ- 
ing, they  were  but  the  Spirit's  organ  of  communication. 
The  Spirit  spake  by  them.  What  they  were  to  write  was 
by  inspiration  conveyed  into  their  minds  in  words  as  it 
was  to  be  written,  and  they  wrote  it  as  being  the  in- 
fallible word  of  God,  which  liveth  and  abideth  forever. 

The  sacred  writers  were  persons  specially  selected  to 
be  the  organs  through  whom  what  was  inspired  into 
their  minds  was  to  be  communicated  and  written,  and 
thereby  to  constitute  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Such  were 
the  prophets  and  apostles  whose  office  in  relation  to  this 
subject,  it  was  to  speak  and  write  the  words  of  God 
conveyed  to  them  by  inspiration.  So  far  as  they  acted 
in  this  official  capacity,  they  spoke  and  wrote  only 
what  was  so  conveyed  to  them.  The  high  priests 


40  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

under  the  Levitical  system,  were,  in  virtue  of  their 
sacerdotal  office,  sometimes  made  the  organs  of  com- 
munication, Divine  announcements  being  inspired  into 
their  minds,  and  vocally  expressed  by  them.  And,  at 
least  in  one  instance — that  of  Balaam — a  false  pretender 
to  the  prophetic  office,  was  made  the  organ  of  commu- 
nicating Divine  messages ;  but  he  was  effectually  re- 
strained from  uttering  any  other  than  the  very  words 
which  were  spoken  to  him  by  Jehovah.  (Numbers 
22  :  23,  etc.) 

That  which  we  take  to  be  the  scriptural  doctrine  of 
Inspiration  is,  that  the  thoughts  which  were  expressed 
in  the  original  texts  were  inspired  into  the  minds  of 
the  sacred  writers  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  words 
which  they  wrote,  and  in  the  order  in  which  they  wrote 
them.  This  doctrine  we  hold  to  be  consistent  alike 
with  the  object,  the  authority,  and  the  infallibility  of 
the  sacred  oracles,  and  with  the  constitution  and  laws 
of  the  human  mind. 

The  objectors  to  this  doctrine  proceed  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  the  agency  or  influence  of  the  Spirit  in 
what  they  denominate  inspiration,  was  exerted  on  the 
faculties  of  the  prophets,  exciting  and  guiding  them ; 
and  their  objections  are  of  no  force  whatever,  except 
on  this  assumption.  The  moment  they  admit,  as  they 
often  tacitly  and  inconsistently  do,  that  by  the  act,  or 
in  the  process,  of  inspiration,  thoughts  were  conveyed 
to  the  minds  of  the  prophets,  their  objections  are  as 
conclusive  against  their  own  theory  as  they  are  de- 
signed to  be  against  the  doctrine  which  they  oppose. 
Hence  Professor  Lee's  distinction  between  Kevelation 
and  Inspiration,  and  his  ascription  of  revelation,  not 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  41 

to  the  agency  of  the  Spirit,  but  exclusively  to  that  of 
the  Logos. 

Moreover,  the  objections  of  all  those,  who  like  the 
author  just  mentioned,  believe  the  truths  as  they  are 
expressed  in  the  words  of  Scripture,  to  be  infallible,  are 
in  fact  as  valid  objections  to  their  theories  as  to  the  doc- 
trine which  they  oppose. 

We  understand  by  inspiration  the  inbreathing,  con- 
veying, transferring,  of  thoughts,  from  the  Divine  mind 
into  the  mind  of  man.  We  mean  nothing  but  that 
Divine  act,  and  conceive  it  to  be  as  properly  affirmed 
of  every  portion  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  of  any  por- 
tion of  those  sacred  writings.  That,  we  apprehend,  is 
what  the  Scriptures  themselves  teach.  All  Scripture 
was  given  by  inspiration  of  God  :  given,  imparted, 
transferred.  When  we  speak  of  the  nature  of  that  Di- 
vine act,  we  mean  simply  that  it  is  the  nature  of  inspira- 
tion to  impart,  convey,  transfer  thoughts  to  the  mind, 
the  intelligent  consciousness,  of  the  recipient ;  as  it  is 
the  nature  of  an  act  of  creation  to  give  existence,  being, 
life,  to  creatures,  or  as  it  is  the  nature  of  articulate  vocal 
utterance  of  words,  to  convey  thoughts  from  one  intel- 
ligent person  to  another.  In  the  Divine  act  of  inspira- 
tion, consequently,  the  agency  of  the  recipient  can  in 
no  wise  have  any  participation  whatever,  any  more  than 
in  a  Divine  act  of  creation,  or  in  the  act  of  one  person 
in  speaking  to  another. 

A  chief  difficulty,  at  which  the  critics  and  theorists 
stumble,  is,  that  any  Divine  inspiration,  or  any  inspira- 
tion by  which  thoughts  were  conveyed  from  the  Divine 
to  the  human  mind,  should  be  asserted  of  those  passages 
in  the  writings  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  in  which 


42  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

they  express  their  personal  sentiments,  experiences,  feel- 
ings, emotions,  desires,  purposes,  and  the  like,  or  any  of 
the  facts  of  their  private  history.  To  one  who  believes 
the  Scriptures  throughout  to  be  of  Divine  authority,  this 
objection  can  have  no  weight;  for  if,  including  the 
passages  in  question,  they  possess  that  authority,  their 
being  invested  with  it  by  a  verbal  inspiration,  can,  in 
no  respect,  be  more  reasonably  objected  to,  than  their 
being  invested  with  such  authority  in  any  other  way. 
If,  as  being  part  of  the  Scripture,  they  are  of  Divine 
authority,  then,  it  must  be  admitted,  that  He  whose 
authority  they  bear,  intended  that  they  should  be  in- 
cluded, just  as  they  are,  in  the  sacred  writings.  The 
thoughts  which  they  convey,  could  not  be  exactly  and 
perfectly  conveyed  in  other  words;  or  in  the  same  words 
differently  arranged.  And  if  the  omniscient  Eevealer 
intended  that  the  thoughts  should  be  expressed  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  then  an  objection  to  their  being  in- 
spired in  the  words  which  were  written  could  have  no 
more  force  or  propriety  than  an  objection  to  a  selection 
of  the  thoughts  and  words  by  the  writers  under  His  in- 
fallible guidance.  The  fact  of  their  being  there  by  His 
volition,  is  the  same  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other. 

Those,  therefore,  who  believe  in  the  Divine  authority 
of  every  part  of  Scripture,  can  no  more  object  to  the 
passages  in  question,  on  the  ground  of  their  being  di- 
vinely inspired,  than  on  the  ground  of  their  having 
been  infallibly  determined  by  Divine  guidance.  Ad- 
mit that  such  passages  express  the  personal  sentiments 
and  affections  of  the  writers,  and  express  them  in  their 
ordinary  phrase  and  diction,  and  it  is,  at  least,  as  con- 
sistent with  their  Divine  authoritv  and  their  infalli- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  43 

bility  to  regard  them  as  having  been  expressly  inspired 
into  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers  to  be  written  as 
part  of  Holy  Scripture,  as  it  is  to  regard  them  as  having 
been  written  under  absolute  and  infallible  guidance. 
Whoever  considers  the  purposes  and  objects  for  which 
the  Holy  Scriptures  were  committed  to  writing,  and 
believes  that  their  other  contents  were  given  by  Divine 
inspiration,  and  are  of  Divine  authority  and  infallible, 
must  believe  that  the  passages  referred  to  were  indis- 
pensable to  those  purposes  and  objects,  and  in  general, 
were  absolutely  necessary  to  the  intelligibility  and  effect 
of  the  didactic  and  historical  passages  with  which  they 
are  interwoven  and  inseparably  connected ;  insomuch 
that  the  other  portions  could  not  be  what  they  are 
without  these,  nor  these  what  they  are  without  the 
others.  To  whatever  extent  it  was  the  purpose  or  ob- 
ject of  the  Scriptures  to  instruct,  and  enlighten  men  in 
respect  to  the  inward  experience  and  the  outward  con- 
duct, of  the  righteous  or  the  wicked,  for  example,  an 
infallible  record  of  their  feelings,  affections,  and  actions, 
was  manifestly  necessary. 


4A  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 


CHAPTER    III. 

OF   MEDIATE    INSTRUMENTALITY   OF   INTERCOURSE   BE- 
TWEEN THE  CREATOR  AND  INTELLIGENT  CREATURES. 

IT  is  obvious  from  the  difference  between  the  nature, 
mode  of  existence,  and  mode  of  action,  of  the  Creator, 
and  those  of  His  rational  creatures,  that  there  must 
needs  be  some  mediate  instrumentality  of  intelligible 
communication  between  them.  Between  the  Infinite 
and  finite  minds  a  constituted  medium,  vehicle,  of  in- 
telligence and  reciprocal  communication,  is  manifestly 
necessary.  It  is  not  conceivable  that  any  interchange 
of  thoughts,  any  mutual  intercourse,  could  take  place 
without  such  instrumentality.  To  suppose  the  con- 
trary would  be  to  suppose  that  the  creature  could  com- 
prehend the  mind  of  the  Creator,  so  as  to  know  the  Di- 
vine thoughts  without  any  expression  or  manifestation 
of  them  in  any  way. 

It  is  no  less  apparent  that  the  medium  of  intellectual 
and  spiritual  intercourse  must  be  in  harmony  with  the 
nature  and  within  the  capacity  of  man,  so  as  to  be 
available  to  him  in  the  ordinary  exercise  of  his  facul- 
ties under  all  circumstances  ;  and  so  as  to  involve  and 
be  the  vehicle  of  his  intuitions  and  primary  beliefs, 


OF   THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURES.  45 

and  of  his  consciousness.  It  must  needs  be  to  him  a 
perfect  vehicle  and  instrument  of  his  knowledge  of  the 
Divine  Will  as  the  rule  of  his  faith  and  life.  In  the 
nature  of  the  case,  it  must  be  a  medium  provided  and 
appointed  by  the  Creator  and  Lawgiver  of  man. 

Such  a  medium,  vehicle,  instrument,  is  language^ 
speech,  words,  articulate  voices,  significant  and  intelli- 
gible signs.  By  this  instrumentality  the  Divine 
thoughts  are  expressed  to  man,  and  received  and  under- 
stood by  him.  It  is  interposed  between  the  speaker 
and  the  hearer.  It  is  the  vehicle  by  which  thoughts 
are  transferred  from  one  mind  to  another.  Without  it 
no  intelligence  is  conveyed.  Without  words  or  equiva- 
lent signs  man  neither  conceives  nor  is  conscious  of 
thought.  Thought  is  not  an  object  of  the  senses.  In- 
dependently of  words  it  can  not  be  manifested  or  per- 
ceived. Man  can  know  his  own  thoughts  only  as  he 
conceives  and  is  conscious  of  them  in  words.  One  man 
can  know  the  thoughts  of  another  only  as  they  are  ex- 
pressed and  conveyed  in  words.  So  no  man  can  know 
the  thoughts  of  God  except  as  He  expresses  and  con- 
veys them  in  words.  Language,  in  the  comprehensive 
sense,  in  which  that  term  is  used  in  this  discussion  is 
interposed ;  it  stands  between  mind  and  mind,  as  a 
condition,  adjunct,  instrument,  vehicle,  of  thought. 

Hence  the  name  of  this  instrument  as  the  appointed 
medium  of  conveyance  of  the  Divine  thoughts  to  man, 
is  transferred  and  appropriated  in  Scripture  to  the  Per- 
sonal Logos,  the  Eevealer  of  the  Divine  thoughts,  the 
medium  of  relations  and  intercourse  between  God  and 
man,  the  Mediator,  the  Personal  agent  and  adminis- 
trator in  all  the  Divine  works  of  creation,  providence, 


46  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

and  grace.  His  office,  as  an  intermediate  personal  agent 
in  all  the  relations  of  God  to  the  world,  is  analogous  to 
the  intermediate  office  of  words  in  the  communication 
of  thought.  Accordingly  the  terms,  Dabar,  (Heb.) 
Memra,  (Chal.)  Logos,  (Greek,)  and  Word,  (Eng.)  sig- 
nifying, word,  speech,  thought,  discourse,  are  applied 
as  personal  designations  of  the  Divine  Mediator,  Ke- 
vealer  and  Teacher. 

There  is  uniformly  a  difference  between  the  meaning 
and  use  of  the  Hebrew  term  Dabar,  translated  word, 
that  which  is  vocally  expressed,  and  Amar — translated, 
say,  saying,  said.  The  latter  term  signifies  merely  the 
action  of  the  speaker  in  uttering  words,  and  is  accord- 
ingly followed  by  the  words  uttered.  Hence  the  rela- 
tions in  which  the  two  words  occur :  as  in  Gen.  15, 
where  Dabar  seems,  indeed,  to  designate  the  Personal 
Word.  "  Dabar  Jehovah  " —  the  Word  of  the  Lord, 
came  to  Abram  in  a  vision,  (Amar,)  saying,  Fear  not, 
Abram,  I  am  thy  Shield.  And  Abram  (Amar,)  said, 
Lord  God,  what  wilt  thou  give  me?  ....  And  Abram 
(Amar,)s&id,  Behold  to  me  thou  hast  given  no  seed.  .  .  . 
And  behold  "Dabar  Jehovah,"  the  Word  of  the  Lord 
came  unto  Him,  (Amar,)  saying,  this  shall  not  be  thine 

heir And  He  brought  him  forth  abroad  and 

(Amar)  said,  Look  now  towards  heaven,  and  tell  the 
stars,  if  thou  be  able  to  number  them  :  and  He,  (Amar) 
said  unto  him,  So  shall  thy  seed  be.  And  he  believed 
in  Jehovah. 

There  is  a  like  difference  in  the  New  Testament,  be- 
tween "  Logos"  translated  word,  that  which  is  spoken, 
declared,  manifested;  also  the  term  ".Reema" similarly 
applied,  and  the  term  "  Lego,"  translated,  say,  saying, 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  47 

said.  By  the  word  (Logos)  of  God  were  the  heavens 
made. — The  word  (Logos)  was  made  flesh. — His  Word 
(Logos)  was  with  power. — The  Word  (reema)  of  God 
came  unto  John. — The  word  (reema)  is  nigh  thee. — The 
word  (reema)  of  faith. — The  angel  of  the  Lord  ap- 
peared to  Joseph  in  a  dream,  saying,  (Lego,)  Arise  and 
take  the  young  child. — Then  saith  (Lego)  Jesus  unto 
him,  Get  thee  hence. — Verily  I  say  (lego)  unto  you, 
Till  heaven  and  earth  pass. 

This  discriminated  use  of  the  terms  in  question 
strikingly  corroborates  our  view  of  the  office  and  in- 
strumentality of  language  ;  while  the  Personal  appro- 
priation of  the  chief  of  those  terms,  demonstrates  the 
verbal  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.  An  Invisible  Di- 
vine Person — as  invisible  and  intangible  as  thought  is — 
becomes  manifest  by  assuming  and  incorporating  a 
visible  nature  with  His  Person.  Prior  to  His  incarna- 
tion the  presence  and  agency  of  that  Divine  Mediato- 
rial Administrator  and  Revealer,  was  signified  by  His 
vocal  utterance  of  words.  His  audible  voice,  His 
word,  being  the  signal  of  the  exertion  of  His  power, 
and  His  instrument  in  the  expression  of  His  thoughts, 
and  being  especially  that  by  which  His  presence  and 
agency  were  known  when  He  was  not  personally  visible, 
He  was  naturally  and  appropriately  denominated  by 
the  names  of  that  instrument  of  manifestation,  as 
signifying  the  presence  of  Him  who  represented  and 
manifested  the  invisible  God,  as  our  words  represent 
and  manifest  our  minds  and  thoughts. 

Thus  how  often  were  the  Patriarchs  and  Prophets 
unexpectedly  and  unmistakably  notified  of  His  Per- 
sonal presence  by  the  vocal  utterance  of  His  words. 


48  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

How  often  do  we  read  that  Dabar  Jehovah  came,  say- 
ing— to  Abraham,  Fear  not — to  Samuel,  It  repenteth 
me  that  I  have  set  up  Saul  to  be  King — to  Gad,  Go 
and  say  unto  David,  Thus  saith  Jehovah,  I  offer  thee 
three  things— to  Solomon,  If  thou  wilt  walk  in  my 
statutes — to  Jehu,  Forasmuch  as  I  called  thee  out  of 
the  dust — to  Elijah,  Get  thee  hence — Go  show  thyself 
to  Ahab ;  and  so  to  others.  His  word  was  also  the 
vehicle  of  His  power  in  the  production  of  physical, 
as  well  as  of  moral  effects,  as  is  signified  in  every  part 
of  Scripture.  "  He  sent  His  word  (Dabar)  and  healed 
them  and  delivered  them  from  their  destructions." 
Or  as  expressed  in  the  critical  version  of  Alexander : 
"  He  sends 'His  word  and  heals  them,  and  makes  them 
escape  from  their  destruction.  He  sends  His  word, 
He  issues  His  command,  exerts  His  sovereign  power 
and  authority."  (Ps.  107  :  20.)  "  By  the  word  (dabar) 
of  Jehovah  were  the  heavens  made.  .  .  .  For  He  spake, 
(amar)  and  it  was  done.  He  commanded,  and  it  stood 
fast.  For  (it  was)  He  (that)  said,  (Be)  and  it  was :  (it 
was)  He  (that)  commanded,  and  it  stood — stood,  ap- 
peared, came  into  existence."  (Alexander,  Ps.  33.) 

In  most  instances  some  special  announcement,  mes- 
sage, or  direction  is  given,  the  occasions  being  such  as 
to  require  the  personal  interference  of  the  speaker.  In 
1  Kings  18  :  31,  there  is  an  incidental  statement  which 
illustrates  the  personal  reference  of  the  term  Dabar,  in 

such  connections "  Jacob,  unto  whom  Dabar 

Jehovah  came,  saying,  Israel  shall  be  thy  name." 
The  reference  is  to  Gen.  32,  where  it  is  recorded  that 
"  there  wrestled  a  Man  with  Jacob  .  .  .  and  He  [the 
man]  said,  Thy  name  shall  be  called  no  more  Jacob, 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  49 

but  Israel ;  for  as  a  prince  hast  thou  power  with  God 
.  .  .  and  hast  prevailed.  .  .  .  And  Jacob  said,  I  have 
seen  God  face  to  face."  In  Hosea  12,  it  is  said  of 
Jacob,  with  reference  to  the  same  occasion,  that  .  .  . 
"  by  his  strength  he  had  power  with  God  :  yea  he  had 
power  over  the  angel " — Malach,  the  Messenger,  the 
delegated  Mediatorial  Person —  "  and  prevailed  :  he 
wept  and  made  supplication  unto  Him  ;  he  found  Him 
in  Bethel ;  even  Jehovah,  Elohim  of  Hosts  ;  Jehovah 
is  His  memorial."  Here  the  delegated  personal  TVord 
appearing  in  the  form  of  Man,  is  identified  with  Je- 
hovah, Elohim,  and  the  Messenger  of  the  covenant. 
(See  Malachi  3,  where  the  Lord  and  the  Messenger  are 
identified  as  the  same.) 

In  various  other  passages,  as  in  those  first  above 
quoted,  special  messages  are  given  to  individuals  on 
occasions  of  emergency.  Dabar  Jehovah — came  to 
Isaiah — with  a  message  to  Hezekiah,  (2  Kings  20,)  and 
the  same  (Isaiah  38)  Dabar  Elohim  came  to  Nathan, 
with  a  message  to  David.  (1  Chron.  17.)  Dabar  Je- 
hovah came  to  David,  saying,  Thou  hast  shed  blood 
thou  shalt  not  build  a  house  unto  mv  name. 

IX 

(1  Chron.  22.)  Dabar  Jehovah  came  to  Shemaiah  with 
a  message  to  Eehoboam.  (2  Chron.  11.)  Again, 
(12  :  7,)  Dabar  the  Elohim  came  to  Shemaiah  .  .  .  say- 
ing, Speak  unto  Eehoboam,  saying,  Thus  saith  Je- 
hovah. (1  Kings  12.)  To  Jeremiah  came  Dabar 
Jehovah,  in  the  days  of  Josiah  .  .  .  also  in  the  days 
of  Jehoiakin  .  .  .  Dabar  Jehovah  came,  saying:  Be- 
fore I  formed  thee.  (Jer.  1,  again  2  :  14  ;  29  :  30.) 

On  the  other  hand  it  is  through  the  instrumentality 
of  words  as  the  vehicle  of  communication  between  God 

3 


50  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

and  man,  that  our  apprehensions  of  the  Divine  Being, 
and  of  the  Person,  attributes,  offices,  and  works  of  the 
Logos  arise,  and  are  realized  to  our  consciousness  in 
the  exercise  of  faith.  The  words  of  God,  the  inspired 
verbal  testimonies  recorded  in  the  Scriptures,  are  the 
instrument  and  medium  of  faith.  Our  associated  verbal 
conceptions  of  what  is  testified  of  Christ,  constitute  in 
our  minds  an  image,  so  to  speak,  a  portraiture,  a  de- 
scription, of  His  Person,  His  perfections,  and  His 
works.  We  see  Him,  mentally,  by  faith,  as  the  in- 
spired words  describe  Him.  We  see  Him  through  the 
words,  as  through  an  interposed  medium — obscurely,  in- 
deed, as  compared  with  seeing  Him  directly  face  to  face — 
yet  in  a  manner  which  faith  renders  efficacious.  "  We 
see  as  through  a  mirror  :  the  optical  impression  is,  that 
the  object  is  behind  the  mirror,  and  the  spectator  seems 
to  look  through  it.  .  .  .  We  do  not  see  the  things  them- 
selves, but  those  things  as  set  forth  in  symbols  and  words, 
which  imperfectly  express  them.  .  .  .  The  clearest  rev- 
elation of  the  things  of  God  in  words  is  an  enigma,  when 
compared  to  sight. .  .  .  The  Gospel  itself  is  obscure,  com- 
pared to  the  lucid  medium  through  which  we  shall  see 
hereafter.  .  .  .  The  word  of  God  is  a  mirror  wherein 
even  now  we  behold  the  glory  of  the  Lord  ;  but  what  is 
that  to  seeing  Him  face  to  face  ?"  (Dr.  Hodge  on  1  Cor. 
13  :  12.)  Still,  though  obscure  compared  to  direct 
vision,  words  are  the  medium,  vehicle,  representative, 
of  all  that  we  discern — all  the  knowledge,  all  the 
thoughts,  all  the  faith  that  we  are  conscious  of.  They 
are  the  mirror,  the  instrument  of  faith.  Faith  cometh 
by  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  God. 

It    was  through    this    instrumentality  —  articulate 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTUKES.  51 

words,  and  visible  signs,  symbols,  types — that  the  Pa- 
triarchs and  Prophets  recognized  Jehovah  in  the  Per- 
son and  character  of  the  Logos.  Abraham,  Jacob, 
Moses,  Joshua,  Manoah,  Jephtha,  David,  Isaiah  and 
others  heard  His  voice,  and  saw  Him  in  the  sign,  sym- 
bol, similitude  of  His  human  nature ;  Moses,  the  Israel- 
ites, the  Priests  and  Prophets,  in  the  cloud-like  form  in 
the  wilderness,  and  the  shekina  in  the  tabernacle  and 
temple,  and  elsewhere  on  particular  occasions,  as,  after 
His  advent,  on  the  mount  of  transfiguration,  and  as  He 
appeared  to  Paul  on  his  way  to  Damascus,  and  to  John 
in  the  Isle  of  Patmos.  The  beholders  of  these  inter- 
posed signs  saw  Him  in  them,  heard  His  voice,  and 
'had  indubitable  evidence  of  His  personal  presence. 
The  signs  supplied  the  place,  and  were  as  significant 
and  as  intelligible  as  words,  and  were  equally  the  me- 
dium and  instrument  of  thought  and  faith. 

The  appropriate  and  conclusive  inference  from  these 
considerations  and  references,  is.  that  the  language — the 
words,  signs,  symbols— by  which  Jehovah,  the  Logos, 
conveyed  the  Divine  thoughts  to  man,  which  also  He 
employed  as  the  vehicle  of  His  power  and  grace  to 
Patriarchs,  Prophets,  and  Apostles,  and  which  He 
commissioned  holy  men  to  write  and  publish  as  His 
words,  infallibly  expressing  His  unchangeable  thoughts, 
His  testimonies,  messages,  commands,  counsels,  cove- 
nants, promises,  predictions,  warnings,  instructions, 
were  not  selected  or  modified  by  man's  wisdom  or 
agency.  By  the  instrumentality  which  He  assigned  to 
His  word,  as  He  spake  it  to  His  servants,  and  inspired 
it  into  the  minds  of  His  chosen  penmen,  He  magnified 
it  as  His  vehicle  of  manifestation,  above  all  His  Name — 


52  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

all  the  other  methods  by  which  He  manifested  His 
perfections  to  His  creatures.  As  His  vehicle  of  intelli- 
gence and  intercourse,  it  is  as  infallible,  and  unchange- 
able, as  His  nature  and  His  purposes. 

To  this  mediate  instrumentality  of  words,  as  the  ve- 
hicle of  thought,  the  constitution  of  man  is  perfectly 
adapted.  Thinking  is  voluntary  conscious  mental 
action.  Thought  is  the  effect,  product,  of  such  action ; 
realized  to  our  consciousness  by  being  conceived  in 
words  as  its  necessary  condition,  mode,  form,  vesture, 
vehicle  ;  the  instrument  of  the  mind  in  conceiving  it, 
of  the  memory  in  retaining  it,  and  of  the  voice  and 
the  pen  in  conveying  it  to  other  minds. 

As  seeing  is  the  conscious  action  of  the  mind 
through  the  visual  organ,  as  its  instrument  preadjusted 
to  the  effect  of  light  reflected  from  external  objects  ; 
so  thinking  is  the  conscious  action  of  the  mind 
through  language  —  words  and  signs  of  which  the 
meaning,  usage,  and  relations,  have  been  previously 
learned,  and  which,  as  memory  reflects  them,  are  pre- 
adjusted to  the  cogitative  action.  And  as  hearing  is 
the  conscious  action  of  the  mind  through  the  auricular 
organ,  preadjusted  to  the  effect  of  different  sounds  ;  so 
thinking  is  the  conscious  action  of  the  mind  preadjust- 
ed to  the  use  of  words  as  its  instrument  and  vehicle,  so 
that,  having  learned  the  meaning  of  words,  it  distin- 
guishes between  them,  and  uses  those  which  its 
thoughts  require.  Such  preadjustinent,  adaptation,  ca- 
pacity, power,  is  dormant  and  ineffectual,  till  the  mean- 
ing of  words  and  signs  is  acquired  ;  as  the  organic  pre- 
adjustment,  adaptation,  capacity,  power  of  the  eye,  is 
dormant  in  the  absence  of  light ;  that  of  the  ear,  in  the 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  53 

absence  of  sound ;    and  that  of  our   primary  beliefs, 
in  the  absence  of  conscious  thought. 

Hence,  according  to  our  constitution  and  our  con- 
sciousness, we  think  in  words  as  the  element,  pre-requi- 
site  condition,  matrix,  pabulum  of  thought ;  insomuch 
that  a  thought  as  such,  is  realized  to  our  consciousness, 
only  in  its  concrete  verbal  form  ;  the  form  in  which  it 
is  conceived  and  remembered,  and  in  which  it  is  ex- 
pressed vocally  to  the  ear,  and  chirographically  to  the 
eye. 

All  our  thoughts  accordingly  originate,  exist,  are 
realized,  remembered,  and  expressed,  in  this  concrete 
form.  The  thoughts  which  rise  in  our  tranquil  and 
solitary  musings,  in  our  busiest  excitements,  in  our 
highest  efforts  of  mathematical,  logical,  and  scientific 
abstraction,  and  in  dreams,  trances,  and  visions,  present 
themselves  in  this  verbal  form — thoughts  in  words. 
And,  in  like  manner,  all  the  thoughts  which  are  con- 
veyed into  our  minds  and  realized  to  our  consciousness 
from  without,  are  conveyed  and  received  in  this  con- 
crete form  ;  whether  they  are  conveyed  to  us  by  vocal 
articulations,  and  received  by  hearing  the  spoken 
words,  or  are  conveyed  to  us  by  chirographic  charac- 
ters, and  received  by  seeing  the  written  words ;  or 
whether,  in  like  conformity  to  man's  constitution,  they 
are  conveyed  to  the  intelligent  consciousness  of  pro- 
phets, from  the  Divine  Intelligence,  by  Inspiration. 

Such  is  the  law  of  our  minds — of  the  cogitative  ac- 
tion, of  the  intellect,  of  thinking,  of  consciousness,  of 
memory,  of  imparting  and  receiving  thoughts,  of  ren- 
dering them  audible  by  the  voice,  visible  by  the  pen, 
permanent  by  written  characters,  and  transmissible  by 
printed  marks  and  by  electric  influence. 


54:  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 


CHAPTER    IV, 

REFERENCE  TO  AN  ARTICLE   ON  INSPIRATION,  IN  THE 

BIBLOTHECA   SACRA. 

IF  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  tlie  word  of  God,  it  can, 
no  doubt,  be  clearly  shown  on  what  ground  they  are 
properly  so  denominated.  An  inquiry  into  the  subject, 
however,  necessarily  involves  the  consideration  of  a 
variety  of  incidental  questions.  What  is  meant  by 
the  assertion  that  they  are  the  word  of  God  ?  Is  it 
meant  that  they  are  His  word,  in  the  same  sense  that 
words  as  uttered  bv  men,  in  their  intercourse  with  each 

«/  ' 

other,  are  their  words  ?  If  so,  must  He  not  have 
uttered,  imparted,  inspired  them  to  express  His 
thoughts,  as  really  as  men  utter  their  words  to  express 
their  thoughts  ?  Can  they  be  His  words,  His  infallible 
words,  involving  His  infinite  authority,  unless  He  ut- 
tered them,  any  more  than  words  which  a  man  does 
not  utter  can  be  made  his  words  ?  Is  it  said  that  the 
words  were  selected  by  man,  but  that  God  adopted 
them  and  thereby  made  them  His  ?  If  He  so  adopted 
them  as  to  make  them  His,  and  invest  them  with  His 
immutable  authority  and  infallibility,  does  that — sup- 
posing there  were  any  evidence  of  it — at  all  help  the 
matter  ?  Is  not  that  equivalent  to  an  original  selection 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  55 

of  them  by  Him  ?  Were  they  not  as  much  His  words 
as  if  He  had  dictated  instead  of  adopting  them  ?  Did 
they  not  become  authoritative  and  infallible  simply  as 
being  His,  and  not  as  being  man's  words  ?  Were  they 
any  longer,  in  any  sense,  man's  words  after  they  were 
rendered  infallible?  Is  not  a  man's  adopting  the 
words  of  another  so  as  to  make  them  his  and  involve 
his  responsibility,  equivalent  in  every  respect  to  his 
speaking  or  writing  them  ?  If  one  man  adopts  as  his 
own  the  words  of  another,  he  must  know  the  words, 
how  they  are  arranged,  what,  as  so  arranged,  they  sig- 
nify, and  their  purpose  and  effect  in  relation  to  himself 
and  others.  To  adopt  them  with  such  knowledge,  im- 
plies that  he  could  as  easily  utter  them  vocally  or 
otherwise,  as  he  could,  on  hearing  or  reading  them, 
signify  his  acceptance  or  adoption  of  them. 

Is  it  inspiration  which  makes  the  Scriptures  the 
word  of  God  ?  What  then  is  meant  by  the  term  in- 
spiration f  Does  it  mean  simply  an  act  of  Grod  by 
which  He  conveyed  His  thoughts  to  those  whom  He 
appointed  to  record  them  ?  If  so,  did  He  inspire  into 
their  minds  His  words  as  well  as  His  thoughts  ?  Did 
He  do  this  with  respect  to  all  the  contents  of  Scripture, 
all,  as  what  He  determined  should  be  written  in  His 
name  and  on  His  authority  ?  Or  did  He  do  it  with 
respect  to  His  direct  original  revelations,  and  not  with 
respect  to  matters  which  were  within  the  knowledge 
and  experience  of  the  writers  ?  Did  He  so  inspire  a 
part  exclusively  by  His  own  Divine  act,  and  only  aid, 
assist,  guide,  the  writers  in  respect  to  the  rest — guide 
them  in  the  exercise  of  their  faculties  in  recording  their 
own  thoughts  in  their  own  words?  Is  such  guidance 


56  THE   PLENAEY   INSPIRATION 

warrantably  called  inspiration  ?  Do  the  Scriptures  so 
denominate  it?  Do  they  tell  us  of  more  than  one 
kind  of  Inspiration?  If  guidance  and  assistance  is 
Divine  Inspiration,  how  shall  it  be  distinguished  from 
those  restraining  and  sanctifying  influences  which  are 
common  to  all  good  men,  or  from  those  influences 
which  are  common  to  all  men?  If  portions  of  the 
Scriptures  consist  of  the  thoughts  and  words  of  men, 
not  expressly  inspired  into  their  minds  to  be  re- 
corded, but  simply  as  known  to  them  in  the  ordinary 
way,  and  recorded  by  them  under  a  Divine  influence 
which  merely  assisted  them  to  record  them  accurately, 
did  that  influence  affect  the  character  of  the  record  any 
further  than  to  secure  its  accuracy?  Did  it  extend 
back  and  decide,  and  select,  w^hat  should  go  into  the 
record  ?  Did  it  make  man's  thoughts  and  words  God's 
thoughts  and  words  ?  Did  it  invest  them  with  His  au- 
thority ?  Is  their  being  truthfully  and  accurately  re- 
corded, the  ground  on  which  they  are  called  the  word 
of  God  ?  Is  their  infallibility  asserted  on  the  ground 
that  what  is  accurately  recorded  is  for  that  reason  in- 
fallible truth? 

If  there  are  different  kinds  of  inspiration,  are  there 
also  different  degrees  of  the  several  kinds  ?  If  that 
kind  which  guided  and  assisted  the  prophets  to  record 
with  accuracy  what  they  previously  knew  as  men,  was 
of  different  degrees ;  if  there  was  a  higher  degree  of 
assisting  and  guiding  influence  on  the  minds  of  some 
prophets  than  on  the  minds  of  others,  or  on  the  mind 
of  the  same  prophet  at  different  times ;  if  they  were 
less  effectually  guided  at  one  time  than  at  another,  and 
in  respect  to  some  things  than  in  respect  to  others,  how 


OF   THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURES.  57 

shall  we  distinguish  the  different  effects  of  these  differ- 
ent degrees  of  influence — the  different  degrees  of  ac- 
curacy, authority,  and  infallibility  ? 

"We  appeal  to  those  who  are  conversant  with  the 
subject,  whether  the  various  treatises,  essays,  reviews, 
etc.,  of  all  the  schools  of  theology,  philosophy,  and  specu- 
lation, which  purport  to  explain  the  nature,  mode,  extent, 
and  effects  of  Inspiration,  do  not  employ  that  term  to 
signify  whatever  the  preconceived  theological,  philoso- 
phical, or  speculative  systems  or  theories  of  the  writers 
respectively  demand  for  their  own  supporter  defense,  in- 
stead of  employing  it  in  the  one  clear  and  definite 
sense  which  it  bears  in  the  Scriptures  themselves? 
Can  any  two  writers,  or,  at  least,  any  two  who  differ  in 
their  theological  and  speculative  opinions,  be  named, 
who  define  Inspiration  alike  ?  Do  not  the  definitions 
and  discussions  of  the  respective  writers,  manifestly 
proceed  upon  the  assumption,  that  Inspiration  as 
asserted  with  reference  to  the  Scriptures,  must  mean 
just  what  their  theory  requires  it  should  mean  ?  As 
they  believe  in  their  theory  of  religion,  and  philoso- 
phy, and  in  inspiration  as  being  involved  in  it,  or  as 
bearing  a  certain  relation  to  it,  they  define  that  to  be 
Inspiration  which  is  consistent  with  their  beliefs  on  re- 
lated subjects,  and  demanded  by  them.  Which  of 
them  has  started  with  the  scriptural  signification  and 
use  of  the  term,  adhered  to  it,  followed  it  out  to  its 
consequences,  and  adjusted  or  modified  his  other  be- 
liefs accordingly?  Which  of  them  has  strictly  ad- 
hered to  his  own  definition,  when  exhibiting  his  proofs 
and  illustrations  ?  Which  of  them  has  not  in  his  en- 
deavors to  reconcile  the  express  assertions  of  Scripture. 

3* 


58  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

to   his  theory,  crossed  his  own   track  and   confuted 
himself? 

It  is  presumed  to  be  quite  safe  to  say,  that,  in  regard 
to  the  nature  of  Divine  Inspiration,  and  the  effects  to 
be  ascribed  to  it,  the  public  mind,  both  in  and  out  of 
the  churches  of  Protestant  Christendom,  was  never 
more  unsettled  than  at  present,  or  more  extensively 
under  the  influence  of  discordant,  erroneous,  and  dan- 
gerous theories.  It  would  be  tedious  and  perhaps  use- 
less to  verify  this  by  any  extended  references.  An  in- 
stance, which  happens  at  the  moment  to  be  at  hand, 
that  of  an  article  in  one  of  the  oldest,  and  most 
effective  and  influential  of  the  periodical  vehicles  of 
theology  and  criticism  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic, 
The  BiUiotheca  Sacra  and  Biblical  Repository,  No. 
109,  Jan.  1858,  may  serve  as  an  illustration.  It  is 
an  article  on  Inspiration,  and  is  founded  essentially  on 
the  discourses  of  Professor  Lee  on  that  subject.  From 
its  authorship  and  the  channel  of  its  publication,  its 
sentiments  may  be  presumed  to  be  substantially  those 
of  the  supporters  and  readers  of  the  work  in  which  it 
appears  ;  and  both  its  theory  audits  inconsistencies,  may 
be  presumed  to  prevail  extensively  among  those  who 
reverence  and  who  believe  the  Scriptures. 

"  We  might  infer,"  says  the  writer,  from  the  import- 
ance of  every  part  of  the  contents  of  the  Bible,  "  that 
all  Scripture,  whether  revelation  or  not,  would  be  writ- 
ten under  such  a  Divine  guidance  and  direction  as 
would  effectually  secure  its  human  authors  from  mis- 
take, and  enable  them  to  write  just  what  God  would 
have  them  write,  and  in  just  the  manner  in  which  he 
would  have  it  written.  And  this  is  what  we  mean, 


OF   THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  59 

specifically,  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures :  that  de- 
gree of  assistance  afforded  to  the  writers,  which  was  ne- 
cessary to  preserve  them  from  imperfection  and  error, 
in  making  the  record  of  God's  truth  and  will."    (P.  33.) 
"  Inspiration  denotes  the  assistance  afforded  in  the  utter- 
ance of  God's  truth,  or  in  recording  what  God  was 
pleased  to  have  written  in  His  word.     All  Scripture  is 
not  Divine  revelation;    but  all  Scripture  is  written 
under  a  Divine  Inspiration,  and  consequently  is  an  in- 
fallible record  of  what  God  would  have  recorded  for  our 
'instruction  in  righteousness."      (P.  34.)     "  "We  have 
said  that  inspiration  denotes  the  special  assistance  afford- 
ed to  the  sacred  speaker  or  writer,  in  giving  utterance  to  the 
Divine  word"   (P.  35.)    "  Those  who  hold  to  the  plenary 
inspiration   of  the  Scriptures,   do  not  claim  that  the 
same  kind  and  degree  of  assistance  icas,  in  all  cases, 
afforded  to  the  sacred  writers ;  and  for  the  very  good 
reason,  that  the  same  was  not,  in  all  cases,   needed. 
When  recording  direct  revelations  from  God — things 
about  which  they  had  no  other  means  of  knowledge  ; 
or  when  recording,  as  they  often  did,  the  very  words 
of  the  Lord,  uttered  by  Him  in  His  own  proper  person  ; 
they  must  have  had  what  has  been  called  the  inspira- 
tion of  suggestion.     The  very  words  to  be  recorded  must 
have  been   suggested  to  them.      And   when    recording 
things  which  they  had  once  known,  but  had  been  for- 
gotten, they  needed  (what  the  Saviour  promised  his 
disciples)  the  aid  of  the  Spirit  to  bring  all  things  to 
their   remembrance.      But  when  recording  events  of 
which  the}''  were  fully  informed,  either  from  personal 
observation  or  the  information  of  others,  they  needed 
only  such  a  supervision  as  should  prevent  all  defect  and 


60  THE    PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

mistake,  and  lead  them  to  record,  and  in  the  right 
manner,  that,  and  that  only,  which  was  agreeable  to 
the  Divine  will.  In  every  case  they  had  such  assist- 
ance as  they  needed  in  order  to  execute  their  commis- 
sion, and  give  to  the  world  a  divinely  accredited  record 
of  the  sacred  word — an  infallible  standard  of  duty  and 
of  truth."  (P.  36.) 

Now,  without  dwelling  on  the  nature  or  proof  of 
the  alleged  guidance,  which  we  purpose  to  touch  on 
elsewhere,  we  submit  that  the  Scriptures  no  where 
teach,  that  Inspiration  was  of  the  nature  or  produced 
the  effect  of  guidance.  That  which  they  specifically 
teach  is,  that  what  is  written  was  given,  imparted^ 
conveyed  to  the  writers  by  inspiration.  It  was 
Theopneustos,  God-breathed,  God-inspired  —  conveyed 
from  God  by  inspiration  to  the  sacred  penmen. 
"We  find  in  Scripture  nothing  different  from  this ; 
nothing  of  different  kinds  and  degrees  of  inspira- 
tion ;  nothing  whatever  of  assistance  in  writing  as  in- 
spiration. And  we  take  it  to  be  beyond  a  question  that 
the  definitions  above  quoted  are  not  definitions  of  the 
inspiration  which  the  Scriptures  teach  and  claim.  They 
are  definitions  of  an  influence  assumed  to  be  necessary, 
not  to  put  the  writers  in  possession  of  what  they  were  to 
write,  but  to  assist  and  preserve  them  from  error  in  writ- 
ing what  they  were  already  possessed  of.  They  restrict 
the  object,  influence,  and  effect  of  inspiration  to  this. 
And  in  respect  to  considerable  portions  of  Scripture  they 
leave  us  in  the  dark  as  to  how  the  writers  became  pos- 
sessed of  what  they  wrote.  The  author  says,  indeed 
that  u  they  must  have  had  what  has  been  called  the  in- 
spiration of  suggestion."  This,  besides  not  being 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCEIPTUKES.  61 

covered  by  his  definition,  is  a  mere  hypothesis,  an 
inference  from  a  false  theory,  no  inspiration  of 
that  kind  being  taught  in  Scripture  ;  not  guidance  or 
assistance  in  writing — not  inspiration  in  his  sense  of 
that  term,  neither  taught  in  Scripture,  nor  consistent 
with  what  they  teach.  The  very  words,  he  says,  must 
have  been  suggested  to  them.  But  if  he  means  by  that 
the  Divine  act  of  Inspiration,  which,  instead  of  sug- 
gesting, explicitly  gave,  imparted,  the  very  words  of  a 
large  portion  of  the  Scriptures,  why  could  not  that 
same  kind  of  inspiration  as  the  Scriptures  teach,  have 
given  all  the  other  words  of  Scripture,  so  as  to  leave  us 
in  no  uncertainty  as  to  their  being  all  the  authoritative 
and  infallible  words  of  God  ?  Why  resort  to  the  gra- 
tuitous hypothesis  that  the  prophets  and  apostles 
were  left  to  select  from  the  mass  of  facts  and  events 
known  to  them  before,  such  as  they  thought  proper  to 
insert  in  their  records,  subject  only  to  a  supervisory, 
assisting,  guiding,  influence  merely  to  insure  their  re- 
cording them  accurately  ?  Why  rest  the  infallibility 
of  what  they  wrote  on  such  a  basis  ?  If  the  very 
words  in  which  all  the  revelations  are  recorded,  were  con- 
veyed to  the  writers  either  by  vocal  utterance  or  by  in- 
spiration, as  the  author  holds,  then  more  than  half  of 
all  the  words  recorded  in  the  Bible  were  so  given,  and 
on  that  ground  it  is  that  they  are  the  infallible  words 
of  Grod.  He  spoke  them  audibly  to  the  prophets,  or 
conveyed  them  to  their  minds  by  inspiration,  and 
spake  them  by  the  mouths  of  the  prophets  and  "  all 
the  prophets  since  the  world  began."  If  He  conveyed 
and  spoke  revelations  in  this  way,  why  should  He  not 
convey  and  speak  all  the  other  contents  in  the  same 


62  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

way,  by  the  only  kind  of  inspiration  which  the 
Scriptures  themselves  assert?  They  are  all  alike 
declared  to  be  His  word.  The  Scriptures  themselves 
admit  no  difference.  When  passages  are  quoted  from 
one  part  into  another,  whether  originally  direct  reve- 
lations or  not,  they  are  quoted  as  the  infallible  words 
of  God.  Historical,  biographical,  and  other  passages 
which  were  not  originally  revelations,  but  were  within 
the  previous  knowledge  of  the  original  writers,  are 
quoted,  not  as  the  words  of  men,  rendered  infallible 
words  by  a  Divine  guidance  and  assistance  afforded  to 
the  writers  in  making  their  record  of  them ;  but  as 
being  originally  the  infallible  words  of  God.  Doubt- 
less many  revelations  were  made  which  were  not 
recorded.  And  if  God  determined  by  speaking  or 
inspiring  the  very  words,  which  should  be  recorded, 
could  it  be  less  necessary  that  He  should  determine 
and  inspire  the  very  words  of  all  the  other  matter 
which  is  intermingled  and  connected  with  the  revela- 
tions, equally  necessary  to  the  object  of  the  Scriptures 
and  to  which  the  Divine  authority  and  infallibility  is 
equally  essential  ? 

But  like  Professor  Lee,  this  author,  who  believes 
the  Scriptures  cpllectively  to  be  the  word  of  God,  in- 
spired, and  infallible,  when  he  comes  to  prove  them  to 
be  such,  forgets  his  theory  and  speaks  after  the  manner 
of  Scripture.  Thus :  "  In  no  small  part  of  the  Old 
Testament,  we  have  God  himself  speaking  in  the  first 
person.  We  have  what  purport  to  be  his  own  words. 
And  if  the  Bible  is  true,  these  are  his  own  words  ;  and 
the  sacred  writers  must  have  been  verbally  inspired  in 
recording  them."  (P.  38.)  Here  he  assigns  to  the  word 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  63 

inspired  a  meaning  different  from  that  assigned  to  it  by 
his  theory  and  his  definition — different  from  that  of 
guidance  and  assistance  in  recording  words  already 
known.  A  verbal  inspiration  is  an  inspiration  of 
words  —  of  thoughts  in  words.  It  gives  the  words 
which  are  to  be  recorded.  Again : 

"  There  are  still  other  portions  of  the  Bible  which 
(if  they  are  true)  must,  from  the  very  nature  of  the 
case,  be  inspired.  We  refer  to  those  parts  in  which 
the  writer  records  transactions  which  took  place  long 
ages  before  he  was  born.  For  example,  how  did  Moses 
know  what  God  said  to  Adam,  and  Cain,  and  Noah, 
and  Abraham,  and  the  other  patriarchs,  and  what 
these  men  said  in  reply,  unless  he  were  under  a  Divine 
inspiration?  He  might  have  received  some  general 
account  of  things  by  tradition  :  but  he  does  not  profess 
to  record  doubtful  traditions,  but  the  very  words  which 
were  spoken  one  way  and  the  other.  But  in  order  to 
do  this,  he  must  have  had  a  plenary  verbal  inspiration." 
(P.  39.)  That  is,  he  must  have  had  an  inspiration 
which  gave,  imparted,  conveyed  to  him  the  very  words 
which  he  was  to  write. 

"  The  writers  of  both  Testaments  .  .  .  claimed  to 
speak,  not  their  own  words,  but  the  words  of  God  .  .  . 
in  many  instances,  through  whole  chapters,  they  pro- 
fess to  give  the  very  words  of  the  Most  High  ;  a  thing 
which  they  could  never  do,  unless  these  words  were 
suggested  to  them  at  the  time.  David  says  of  himself: 
The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  spoke  in  me,  and  His  word  was 
in  my  tongue.  The  Spirit  entered  into  me,  says  Ezekiel, 
ivhen  He  spake  to  me,  and  set  me  upon  my  feet,  that  I 
heard  Him  that  spake  unto  me.  The  writers  of  the  New 


64  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

Testament  customarily  speak  of  their  communications 
as  the  ivord  of  God.  .  .  They  spake  the  word  of  God, 
with  boldness.  .  .  Our  Saviour  uniformly  speaks  of 
the  Scriptures  ...  as  the  word  of  God,  and,  inspired.  .  . 
He  says,  Have  ye  not  read  that  which  was  spoken  unto 
you  by  God,  saying,  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  and 
the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacob  ?  The  Holy 
Ghost  spake  by  the  mouth  of  David.  .  .  Well  spake  the 
Holy  Ghost,  by  Esaias  the  prophet.  The  word  of  God, 
says  Christ,  can  not  be  broken,  .  .  Paul  says,  All  Scrip- 
ture is  given  by  inspiration  of  God."  (Pp.  41,  42.)  In 
these  and  all  the  other  Scripture  testimonies,  cited  by 
the  author,  to  prove  that  the  very  words  of  Scripture, 
as  originally  recorded,  are  all  and  equally  the  infalli- 
ble words  of  God,  given  by  His  act  of  inspiration, 
spoken  by  Him  to  the  writers  and  in  them,  and  re- 
uttered  by  them  vocally  and  by  writing,  there  is  noth- 
ing, asserted  or  implied,  of  the  nature  of  assistance  or 
guidance  in  the  acts  of  uttering  or  writing  ;  nothing  to 
indicate  that  the  guidance,  or  any  guidance,  or  assist- 
ance, or  influence,  under  which  the  sacred  penmen 
performed  the  act  of  writing,  was  of  the  nature  of  inspir- 
ation ;  nothing  to  indicate  that  Divine  inspiration,  as 
taught  in  Scripture,  is  any  thing  more  or  less  than  the 
act  of  God  imparting  to  the  prophets  and  apostles  His 
thoughts  in  His  words,  to  be  uttered  by  them  in  His 
name  and  on  His  authority  as  His  infallible  words.  But 
this  Divine  inspiration  imparts,  conveys,  what  is  to  be 
written,  and  is,  in  nature  and  effect,  wholly  different  from 
that  contemplated  in  our  author's  theory  and  definitions. 
The  same  is  true  of  his  citations  from  the  Fathers : 
"  We  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost  .  .  .  who  spake  by 
the  prophets."  (Nicene  Creed.}  "  Give  diligent  heed  to 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  65 

the  Scriptures,  the  true  sayings  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 
(Clement  of  Rome.)  "  Think  not  that  the  words  which 
you  hear  the  prophet  speaking,  in  his  own  person, 
were  uttered  by  himself  .  .  .  they  are  from  the  Divine 
Word  which  moves  him  "  (Justin  Martyr.)  "  They  were 
unanimous  on  the  subject  of  Inspiration.  .  .  They  cus- 
tomarily speak  of  the  Scriptures  as  the  word  of  God,  the 
voice  of  God,  the  oracles  of  heaven,  the  oracles  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  as  dictated  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  .  .  They  .  .  . 
compare  the  soul  of  the  prophet  to  an  instrument  of 
music,  into  which  the  Holy  Spirit  breathes.  They 
even  represent  those  as  infidels  '  who  do  not  believe  that 
the  Holy  Ghost  uttered  the  Divine  Scriptures.' '  (P.  45.) 
These  passages  which  express  the  sentiments  and 
faith  of  the  Fathers  unanimously,  imply  that  they  re- 
garded the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  as  the  act  of 
God  by  which  he  imparted  to  the  sacred  writers  in  His 
own  words,  what  they  were  to  write  in  His  name,  and 
with  his  infallible  authority.  They  neither  imply  nor 
permit  the  supposition  that  there  was  more  than  one 
kind  or  degree  of  inspiration,  or  that  the  actual  inspi- 
ration was  a  guiding,  assisting,  supervisory  influence, 
wholly  or  in  part.  They  are  the  testimonies  of  good 
men.  They  accord  with  the  faith  of  good  men  in 
every  age.  They  accord,  no  doubt,  with  the  assured 
and  cherished  faith  of  our  author.  But  they  are  not 
to  be  reconciled  with  his  theory  and  definition  of  in- 
spiration and  its  effects,  as  exhibited  in  this  article. 
The  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures  and  of  the  Fathers  is, 
that  all  the  words  written  by  the  prophets  and  apostles 
as  Holy  Scripture  are  the  words  of  God.  That  doc- 
trine is  founded  on  the  fact  that  all  the  words  were 


66  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

spoken,  given,  conveyed,  to  the  writers  by  inspiration 
of  God.  Therefore  they  are  His  words,  and,  as  His 
words,  are  infallible.  And  this,  though  his  theory 
and  definitions  do  not  provide  for  it,  is  just  what  the 
case  requires,  and  just  what  the  author  insists  on  as  in- 
dispensable to  our  safety. 

Thus  he  writes :  "If  the  Bible  is  not  all  inspired, 
then  it  is  not  an  infallible  standard  of  truth  and  duty, 
and  nothing  can  be  certainly  known  or  established  by 
it.  We  may  think  it  a  good  book,  a  remarkable  book, 
the  work  of  good  and  honest  men  ;  and  yet,  if  not  in- 
spired, it  is  marked  with  imperfections,  of  which  its 
readers  must  judge  for  themselves.  We  may  believe 
that  it  contains  revelations  from  God  ;  but  if  it  is  not 
an  inspired  book,  if  it  is  not  all  inspired,  then  who 
shall  tell  us  what  particular  parts  are  inspired  and 
what  not ;  how  much  to  receive  as  the  word  of  God, 
and  how  much  to  impute  to  the  ignorance  or  the  de- 
vice of  man.  One  passage  may  seem  unreasonable  to 
me,  and  I  may  reject  it  as  constituting  no  part  of  the 
revelation.  For  the  same  reason,  my  neighbor  may 
reject  another  passage.  In  this  way,  the  whole  Bible 
may  be  rejected,  while  it  is  professedly  received.  .  .  If 
the  Bible  is  not  inspired,  even  as  to  its  language,  then  it 
does  not  come  to  us  duly  authenticated  as  the  word  and  the 
law  of  God.  In  all  authoritative  communications  or 
laws,  it  is  important  that  we  have  the  precise  words  of 
the  lawgiver.  So  it  is  with  human  laws" — after  illus- 
trating which,  he  adds — "  In  matters  such  as  these,  we 
want,  I  repeat,  the  matured  words  of  the  lawgiver. 
And  just  so  in  respect  to  the  Bible.  The  Bible  pro- 
fesses to  be  a  code  of  laws,  coming  down  to  us  from 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  67 

the  great  Lawgiver  of  the  universe,  and  binding  di- 
rectly on  our  consciences  and  hearts.  But  in  order 
that  it  may  be  duly  authenticated,  may  be  a  rule  of 
life  to  us  here,  and  of  judgment  hereafter,  we  must 
have  the  very  words  of  God.  A  merely  human  record 
of  His  truth  and  will  can  not  bind  us.  We  must  have 
a  Bible,  the  whole  of  which  is  given  by  the  inspiration  of 
God,  or  we  have  no  standard  to  which  we  may  im- 
plicitly appeal,  or  on  which  to  rely."  (Pp.  53,  54.) 

This  is  good  doctrine — sound,  orthodox,  Scriptural, 
irrefragable  ;  and  we  have  not  a  doubt  but  that  the  au- 
thor holds  it  in  sincerity  and  from  inward  conviction. 
But  it  is  totally  inconsistent  with  his  theoretical  defini- 
tion. He  forgets  his  theory,  and  employs  the  word 
inspiration,  in  a  wholly  different  sense  from  that  which 
he  assigns  to  it  in  stating  '  what  he  means,  specifically, 
by  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,"1  namely,  that  degree 
of  assistance  which  was  necessary  to  preserve  the  sacred 
writers  from  error  in  making  their  records.  He  now 
contemplates  inspiration  as  of  one  kind  and  degree 
only — -as  Theopneustos  —  as  conveying  to  the  writers 
the  very  words  of  God,  to  be  recorded — as  so  convey- 
ing all  the  words  of  Scripture,  so  as  to  authenticate 
them  all  alike,  as  being  all  alike  the  authoritative  and 
infallible  word  of  God. 

This  illustration  is  meant,  not  invidiously,  but 
merely  to  show  with  what  facility  learned  men,  Bibli- 
cal critics,  theological  teachers,  whose  creed  is  ortho- 
dox, and  whose  immortal  hopes  rest  on  their  belief 
that  the  words  of  Scripture,  one  and  all,  are  the  very 
words  of  God,  can  adopt  a  speculative  theory  which  is, 
in  terms,  antagonist  alike  to  their  faith  and  to  the 


68  THE   PLENAEY   INSPIKATION 

Scriptures.  Both  the  author  of  this  article,  and  those 
whom  he  ecclesiastically  represents,  and  for  whom  he 
writes,  are  understood  to  hold  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession and  Catechisms  as  representing  their  faith. 
Those  Scriptural  and  time-honored  documents  are  on 
no  subject  more  explicit  than  on  that  now  in  question. 
Thus  the  Confession  :  "  All  the  Scriptures" — each  and 
all  of  the  books  specified  as  of  the  Canon — "  are  given 
by  inspiration  of  God,  to  be  the  rule  of  faith  and  life." 
(Chap.  1.)  "  The  Old  Testament  in  Hebrew,  and  the 
New  Testament  in  Greek,  being  immediately  inspired  ~by 
God,  and  by  His  singular  care  and  providence,  kept 
pure  in  all  ages,  are  therefore  authentical."  (Ibid.) 
This  is  TkeopneustoSj  God -inspired — breathed,  im- 
parted, immediately — to  the  exclusion  of  every  thing 
like  an  inspiration  of  guidance  and  assistance.  Again : 
"  The  Supreme  Judge,  by  whom  all  controversies  of 
religion  are  to  be  determined,  and  all  decrees  of  coun- 
cils, opinions  of  ancient  writers,  doctrines  of  men,  and 
private  spirits,  are  to  be  examined,  and  in  whose  sen- 
tence we  are  to  rest,  can  be  no  other  but  the  Holy  Spirit 
speaking  in  the  Scripture.'1'1  (Ibid.)  "  The  authority  of 
the  Holy  Scripture,  for  which  it  ought  to  be  believed 
and  obeyed,  dependeth  not  upon  the  testimony  of  any 
man  or  church,  but  wholly  upon  God  the  author 
thereof ;  and  therefore  it  is  to  be  received,  because  it 
is  the  word  of  God."  (Ibid.  Art.  4.)  "  The  holy 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  the  word 
of  God,  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  obedience."  (Larger 
Catechism,  2:3.)  "  The  word  of  God,  which  is  con- 
tained in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments, 
is  the  only  rule  to  direct  us  how  we  may  glorify  and 
enjoy  Him."  (Shorter  Catechism,,  2  :  2.) 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  69 

Those  writers  upon  the  subject  of  inspiration,  who 
are  most  concerned  to  show  that  the  Scriptures  are, 
from  first  to  last,  the  word  of  God,  stumble  at  the  diffi- 
culty of  accounting  for  the  fact  that  the  styles  of  the 
different  books  are  characteristically  the  styles  of  the 
respective  writers;  and  they  inadvertently,  or  else  by 
means  of  their  theories,  treat  of  inspiration  as  an  influ- 
ence exerted  on  the  minds,  or  on  particular  faculties,  of 
the  different  penmen,  instead  of  being  simply  a  Divine 
act  conveying  thoughts  verbally  to  them.  They  seem  to 
assume  that  the  styles  employed  depended  on  the  men, 
instead  of  being  determined  by  Him  who  determined 
in  every  particular  what  should  be  written,  and  depend- 
ing on  the  nature  and  purpose  of  the  thoughts  to  be 
expressed ;  that  the  reason  why  the  thoughts  expressed 
by  David  and  Isaiah,  for  example,  are  clothed  in  figur- 
ative and  poetic  diction,  was  that  they  were  poets, 
instead  of  the  reason  being  that  the  thoughts  were  such 
as  to  require  that  diction,  and  being  inspired  into  the 
minds  of  poets  in  figurative  and  poetical  phraseology 
could  be  received  and  rightly  comprehended  by  them, 
with,  facility,  and  in  accordance  with  their  accustomed 
exercise  of  their  natural  faculties  and  peculiar  gifts.  He 
who  determined  what  thoughts  should  be  expressed  in 
writing  as  His,  and  on  His  authority,  of  course,  and  of 
necessity,  must  have  determined  the  words  that  should 
be  written,  and  their  grammatical  form  and  arrange- 
ment. For  none  but  certain  words,  collocated  in  a  certain 
order,  could  exactly  and  infallibly  express  the  thoughts, 
and  modifications  of  thought,  intended  to  be  uttered. 
To  secure  the  end,  therefore,  without  enlarging,  or  in- 
terfering with,  the  free  and  natural  exercise  of  the 


70  THE   PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

faculties  of  the  writers,  men  were  of  necessity  selected 
to  be  the  recipients  and  utterers  of  trie  thoughts,  who, 
by  their  natural  and  acquired  endowments,  were  adapt- 
ed to  receive  and  utter  intelligently,  the  particular 
thoughts  and  words,  literal  or  figurative,  which  were 
inspired  into  their  minds  to  be  recorded.  And  if  all 
the  thoughts  which  are  actually  expressed  in  Scripture, 
were  divinely  pre-determined  to  be  expressed  in  the 
words  which,  in  the  original  text,  perfectly  and  infalli- 
bly express  them ;  then,  beyond  a  doubt,  they  must 
have  been  all  alike  inspired  into  the  minds  of  the 
writers.  If  all  the  thoughts,  and,  therefore,  all  the 
words  of  Scripture,  were  not  divinely  prescribed — if 
any  of  them  are  due,  in  any  respect  or  degree,  to  hu- 
man discretion  and  volition — if  they  were  not  all 
theopneustoi,  imparted  to  the  writers  by  inspiration  of 
Grod,  let  those  believe  them  all  to  be  the  very,  the 
infallible  words  of  God,  who  can  tell  how  they  became 
so,  or  who  require  no  evidence  of  their  being  infallibly 
His.  But  if  they  were  so  predetermined  and  inspired, 
then  there  is  no  ground  of  objection  to  any  one  phrase, 
sentence,  or  passage,  on  account  of  its  matter,  style,  or 
idiom,  any  more  than  to  every  other ;  and  the  fact  that, 
in  numerous  instances,  the  very  thoughts  in  the  very 
words  which  men  had  conceived  and  expressed,  orally 
or  in  writing,  beforehand,  were  expressly  inspired  into 
their  minds  when  they  were  to  be  recorded  as  part  of 
Scripture,  is  no  more  open  to  objection,  than  the  fact 
that  thoughts  wholly  unknown  to '  them  before  were 
conveyed  to  their  minds  by  inspiration,  to  be  recorded 
by  them  as  part  of  Holy  Scripture. 

By  the  words  of  Scripture  being  divinely  predeter- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTUKES.  71 

mined,  reference  is  not  meant  to  the  event  merely  of 
their  being  written  or  to  the  act  of  man  in  writing  pre- 
cisely those  words ;  but  to  the  act  of  God  uttering, 
inspiring,  imparting  them  to  the  writers,  to  be  re- 
corded as  His  word.  It  is  plain  that  a  mere  guidance 
of  man  in  his  acts  of  writing,  or  selecting  and  writing, 
particular  words,  would  not  make  his  act  the  act  of 
God,  or  the  words  selected  by  him,  the  words  of  God, 
any  more  than  the  Divine  guidance  of  holy  men,  in 
acts  of  prayer  or  of  external  obedience,  would  make 
those  acts  the  acts  of  God. 

The  fact  that  the  thoughts  inspired  into  the  mind  of 
Isaiah  are  highly  poetical,  and  that  in  his  record  of 
them,  the  actors  in  the  prophetic  scenes  described,  are 
spoken  of  as  if  they  were  present  to  his  natural  vision, 
no  more  proves  that  a  supernatural  influence  was  ex- 
erted on  his  faculties,  than  the  reception  by  those  who 
are  not  prophets,  by  hearing  or  reading  and  under- 
standing the  same  thoughts  from  his  record,  proves 
that  a  supernatural  influence  is  exerted  on  their  facul- 
ties to  enable  them  to  receive  and  understand  those 
thoughts.  If  they  can  receive  those  thoughts  by  means 
of  the  words  which  he  wrote,  surely  he  could  have 
received  them,  and  they  might  also  receive  them  by 
the  no  less  effectual  means  of  inspiration.  If  this  is 
not  sound  doctrine,  then  written  words  can  do  what 
inspired  words  can  not  do — can  convey  thoughts  with- 
out extra  aid,  which  inspiration  alone  can  not  convey ; 
or  else  the  words  of  Scripture  do  not  in  fact  put  us  in 
possession  of  the  inspired  thoughts,  and  woe  to  us,  if 
the  written  words  do  not  convey  to  us  precisely  the 
thoughts  which  were  conveyed  to  the  prophets  by 


72  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

inspiration — and  if  the  words  of  Grod  are  not  as 
intelligible  to  us  as  they  were  to  the  prophets  them- 
selves ! 

But  no  one  who  believes  that  the  Scriptures  contain 
any  revelations  from  Grod,  entertains  any  doubt  but 
that  He  has,  on  many  occasions,  spoken  to  men,  and 
conveyed  His  thoughts  to  their  intelligent  understand- 
ing and  consciousness,  by  His  audible  utterance  of  His 
own  words.  It  is  therefore  certain  that  He  could  in 
that  way,  infallibly  convey  His  thoughts  to  man.  And 
who  can  presume  to  say,  that  a  conveyance,  on  other 
occasions,  of  His  thoughts  to  the  same  or  other  men, 
by  inspiration,  was  less  effectual — that  He  adopted,  in 
some  cases,  a  perfect  and  infallible  method,  and,  in 
others,  a  method  of  a  different  character  ?  And  with 
what  propriety  can  it  be  objected  to  His  conveying 
His  thoughts  verbally  by  inspiration,  that  it  makes  the 
recipient  a  mere  passive  machine,  any  more  than  that 
a  conveyance  of  His  thoughts  by  audible  vocal  utter- 
ance, or  that  the  conveyance  by  articulate  speech  of 
one  man's  thoughts  to  another,  makes  the  hearer  a 
passive  machine?  Is  any  one  quite  certain  that  the 
Divine  act  of  inspiration  is  of  such  a  nature  that  it  can 
not  convey,  and  infallibly  convey  intelligence?  that 
vocal  sounds  can  do  what  inspiration  can  not  .do  ? 

There  is  abroad  in  controversial,  philosophical,  and 
speculative  writings,  plenty  of  sentimental  ism,  about 
the  insignificance,  unreliableness,  non-importance,  of 
words.  Writers  who  pique  themselves  on  not  believ- 
ing any  thing,  except  upon  siich  evidence  in  kind  and 
degree  as  they  approve  and  demand,  affect  to  regard 
words  either  as  positive  obstacles  to  their  knowledge, 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  73 

or  as  of  little  or  no  consequence  to  their  convictions. 
They  assume  to  have  thoughts  which  they  have  no 
words  to  express — thoughts  which  transcend  the  office 
and  instrumentality  of  words.  They  wish  to  believe 
what  can  not  be  established  and  made  evident  by  any 
selection  or  arrangement  of  words.  "Words  are  in  their 
way.  Words  obtrude  themselves  offensively  against 
what  they  desire  to  believe.  "Words  are  arrayed 
against  them  in  the  Scriptures,  in  catechisms,  confes- 
sions, hymns,  sermons,  treatises,  text  books,  and  in  the 
mouths  of  those  around  them,  young  and  old.  They 
dislike  them  because  they  will  not  serve  their  purposes. 
An  obstinate  no  will  not  permit  itself  to  be  read  as  yes. 
Instead  of  being  mere  servants,  words  affect  the  au- 
thority of  masters.  There  is  no  getting  clear  of  them, 
but  by  setting  them  at  naught,  and  despising  them. 

These  non-verbal  thinkers  can  not  be  met  by  any 
use  of  words.  If  they  can  not  express  their  own 
thoughts  in  words,  a  verbal  argument,  for  or  against 
them,  must  of  course  be  futile.  Perhaps  the  most 
likely  way  to  confound  them,  and  shock  them  suffi- 
ciently to  dissipate  their  illusion,  would  be  to  set  them 
to  translate  the  poems  of  Homer  into  other  Grre?k 
words  or  the  Principia  of  Newton  into  other  Latin 
words,  than  those  of  the  originals.  Let  them  master 
those  authors  so  as  clearly  to  conceive  their  thoughts 
in  the  words  which  they  respectively  used,  and  then 
think  and  express  precisely  those  thoughts,  not  in  an- 
other tongue,  but  in  other  words  of  the  same  languages. 
If  they  can  think  without  words,  then  why,  after  pos- 
sessing themselves  of  the  thoughts  of  those  authors, 
can  they  not  think  them  without  their  words,  and  ex- 

4 


74  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

press  them  in  any  other  words  at  pleasure  ?  If  thoughts 
alone  are  what  the  intellect  has  any  thing  to  do  with,  if 
words  are  indifferent,  non-essential,  unreliable,  why  can 
not  an  author's  thoughts  be  expressed,  and  as  perfectly 
expressed,  by  one  selection  and  succession  of  words,  as 
by  any  other  ?  If  a  man  is  capable  of  understanding 
Newton's  thoughts,  and  of  ascertaining  what  they  were 
by  reading  his  record  of  them,  and  is  also  capable  of 
thinking  without  words,  why  can  he  not  reject  and  for- 
get the  author's  words,  remember  the  thoughts,  and 
write  the  Principia  anew  for  himself  in  other  words  ?  In 
this  way  perhaps  he  may  discover  exactly  what  the 
matter  is  with  him — that  he  has  in  fact,  contrary  to  his 
pretensions,  no  thoughts  whatever  apart  from  words — 
that  Newton's  thoughts  are  inseparable  from  words — 
that  words  are  in  the  nature  of  things  as  essential  a 
condition  of  thought,  as  light  is  of  vision,  air  of  sound, 
figure,  extension,  outline,  of  material  substances. 

Again  the  writers  on  this  subject,  after  setting  out 
on  the  assumption  that  inspiration  is  an  influence  ex- 
erted on  the  faculties  of  the  sacred  writers,  not  only  do 
not  regard  it  simply  as  an  act  of  Grod  involving  His 
omniscience,  His  authority,  and  His  infallibility,  but 
they  do  not  distinguish  between  what  He  did  in  respect 
either  to  the  thoughts  or  words  of  Scripture,  and  what 
man  did  in  receiving  and  committing  them  to  writing. 
Even  those  of  them  who  declare  the  result — the  Scrip- 
tures as  written — to  be  the  infallible  word  of  God,  do 
not  ascribe  either  the  thoughts  or  words  of  Scripture, 
exclusively  to  Him.  They,  indeed,  treat  of  guidance, 
and  infallible  guidance.  But  it  is  the  guidance  of 
ignorant,  fallible,  human  faculties ;  and  where  it  begins 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  75 

or  ends,  specifically  what  it  does,  and  what  man  does, 
what  is  Divine  and  what  is  human  in  the  process  and 
the  result,  no  one  has  so  much  as  attempted  to  tell. 

The  very  same  writers  who,  on  one  page,  maintain, 
that  Inspiration  in  its  only,  or  in  its  proper  and  usual 
form,  was  an  influence  on  the  minds  of  the  sacred 
writers,  stimulating  them  to  unwonted  energy  and  ac- 
tivity, on  the  next,  admit,  that  considerable  portions  of 
the  Scriptures,  predictions  of  future  events,  for  exam- 
ple, were  in  the  most  absolute  and  exclusive  sense, 
revelations — direct  communications  from  God  to  man 
of  thoughts  wholly  undiscoverable  by  the  human  mind, 
however  stimulated,  and  in  which  the  words  to  be 
written  were  as  necessarily  imparted  from  the  Omni- 
scient and  Infinite  Mind  to  the  finite  and  passive  reci- 
pient, as  the  thoughts.  But,  strange  to  say,  instead  of 
seeing  in  this  admission  a  difficulty  fatal  to  their  theory 
of  inspiration — which  ought,  if  sound,  clearly  to  ac- 
count for  such  superhuman  communications — they  treat 
such  portions  of  the  sacred  oracles  as  exceptions  to  the 
general  rule.  .  .  They  do  not  admit  that  the  words  of 
Scripture  were  in  any  case  supplied  by  inspiration. 
They  talk  of  excitement  and  guidance,  but  they  do  not 
allow  that  inspiration  supplied  either  thoughts  or 
words.  With  the  facts  before  them,  1,  that  large  por- 
tions of  the  Scriptures  were  audibly  spoken  by  Jeho- 
vah, and  are  recorded  in  the  very  words  which  He 
uttered :  2,  that  other  portions  are  expressly  said  to 
have  been  spoken  by 'the  Spirit  to  individuals  on  vari- 
ous occasions,  which  also  are  recorded  in  the  very 
words  which  He  uttered :  3,  that  the  very  words  which 
the  apostles  uttered  in  their  preaching,  and  when  called 


76  THE    PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

before  magistrates,  were  directly  supplied  to  them  by 
the  Spirit :  4,  that  the  Spirit  spoke  in  and  by  the  pro- 
phets and  apostles,  and  of  course  uttered  the  very 
words  which  they  uttered :  5,  that  all  Scripture — the 
words  which  were  written  as  Scripture — was  Theop- 
neustos,  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and,  because  so 
given,  is  called  the  infallible  word  of  God :  6,  that  in 
respect  to  much  of  what  is  recorded  as  Scripture,  the 
words  could,  no  more  than  the  thoughts,  be  discovered 
by  finite  intelligences :  7,  that  all  that  is  recorded  is 
alike  the  word  of  God,  and  equally  of  Divine  au- 
thority :  8,  that,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  every 
thought  and  word  of  Scripture,  must  have  been  di- 
vinely pre-determined  :  9,  that  those  portions  of  Scrip- 
ture which  relate  to  matters  within  the  previous  know- 
ledge of  the  individual  writers,  are  not  more  character- 
ized by  their  peculiar  styles  and  idioms,  than  those 
portions  which  were  audibly  spoken  by  Jehovah  :  10, 
that  the  Scriptures  themselves  speak  of  one  kind  of  in- 
spiration only,  and  affirm  that  kind  of  all  their  contents 
indiscriminately  : — they  yet,  by  way  of  showing  why 
the  Sacred  oracles  are,  in  thoughts  and  words,  what 
they  are,  affirm  that  the  writers  were  inspired,  and  de- 
fine and  discuss  inspiration  as  being  an  influence  ex- 
erted on  their  faculties,  by  which,  some  more  and  some 
less,  or  all  alike,  they  were  stimulated  and  guided. 

It  is  worth  a  passing  notice — as  showing  the  vague- 
ness of  their  notions  of  inspiration- -that  the  most 
learned  and  most  evangelical,  of  the  German  critics 
and  expositors  of  the  New  Testament,  proceed  in  their 
criticisms  of  the  original  text,  first,  on  the  assumption 
that  the  evangelists  selected  the  words  which  they 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  77 

wrote  ;  and  second,  on  the  assumption  that  they  were 
themselves  critically  versed  in  the  derivation,  meaning, 
usage  and  grammar  of  the  words,  and  in  all  the  pecu- 
liarities and  niceties  of  the  language.     Had  they  spent 
their  lives  in  the  critical  study  of  the  Greek  which  they 
employed,  no  more  could  be  assumed  as  to  their  know- 
ledge of  it,  than  the  modern  critics  ascribe  to  them. 
Apart  from  this  assumption,  there  would,  with  respect 
to  the  greater  part  of  their  criticisms,  be  no  sense  or 
propriety  whatever  in  them.     But  were  they  instructed 
in  this  manner  ?     Had  they  any  such  critical  know- 
ledge ?     Is  it  likely  that  Matthew,  for  example,  had 
any  exact  knowledge  of  Greek  syntax,  or  of  Greek 
grammar,  or  Greek  literature,  in  any  respect  ?     Yet  he 
wrote  his  text  with  such  conformity  to  grammar  and 
usage,  as  to  challenge  the  criticism  of  those  who  now 
devote  their  lives  to  the  study  of  Greek.     Doubtless 
he  knew  enough  of  that  style  of  Greek,  which  then 
prevailed  in  Palestine,  to  read  and  write  it :  but  pro- 
bably no  one  will  imagine  that  he  had  any  critical 
.knowledge  of  the  language,  and  his  deficiency  in.  that 
respect  may  reasonably  be  adduced  as  proving  that  the 
words  which  he  wrote  were  inspired  into  his  mind  in 
the  order  and  relations  in  which  he  wrote  them,     But 
if  that  occurred  in  the  case  of  Matthew,  or  of  any  one 
of  the  sacred  writers,  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude  that 
it  occurred  for  the  same  or  for  other  reasons,  in  the 
case  of  each  of  the  others.     For  if  the  words  could  be 
inspired  into  the  mind  of  one,  they  could  be  inspired 
into  the  mind  of  each  of  the  others,  and  since,  in  the 
nature  of  the  case,  we  are  forbidden  to  suppose  that 
any  thing  in  the  matter  or  manner  of  the  sacred  text 


78  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

could,  be  erroneous  or  defective  from  human  ignorance 
and  imbecility — the  object  being  infallibly  to  express 
in  words,  the  infallible  thoughts  of  God — we  are  for- 
bidden to  suppose  that  any  thing  of  the  matter  or  man- 
ner, could  be  left  to  depend  on  human  discretion,  or 
on  the  degree  or  the  accuracy  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
sacred  writer.  And  who  will  venture  to  suppose, 
contrary  to  all  the  analogies  both  of  Divine  and  of 
human  wisdom,  that  some  men  were  appointed  to 
write,  who,  being  learned,  needed  no  assistance  in  the 
selection  of  words,  and  that  others  were  appointed, 
who,  being  unlearned,  could  not  select  the  proper 
words,  nor  write  grammatically,  without  an  inspiration 
of  the  words  duly  collocated,  or  such  a  guidance  in  the 
selection  of  words,  as  would  involve  a  constant  mira- 
cle ?  Or  who,  on  the  latter  supposition,  can  fail  to  see 
that  the  writer  could  not  possess,  so  as  to  be  conscious 
of  the  particular  thought  to  be  expressed  in  any  given 
instance,  without  possessing  and  being  conscious  of  it 
in  the  words  by  which  he  should  express  it  ?  When 
conscious  for  the  first  time  of  the  thought,  he  must 
have  been  conscious  of  it  in  the  words  proper  to  ex- 
press it.  Of  course  the  selection  of  the  words  could 
not  be  an  after  process.  Any  change  or  substitution 
of  other  words  for  those  in  which  the  thought  was  first 
consciously  conceived,  would  be  either  to  conceive  pre- 
cisely the  same  thought  in  words  exactly  equivalent  to 
the  original  words  ;  or  to  conceive  the  thought  not  ex- 
actly as  at  first,  but  with  modifications,  so  as  to  require 
new  and  different  words ! 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  79 


CHAPTER    V. 

REFERENCE   TO  AN   ARTICLE   ON   INSPIRATION,  IN  THE 

PRINCETON   REVIEW. 

IT  is  by  no  means  with  less  of  consideration  and  re- 
spect that  we  refer,  for  an  additional  illustration,  to  an 
article  on  the  same  subject,  in  the  very  oldest  of  our 
theological  quarterly  journals,  The  Biblical  Repertory, 
and  Princeton  Review,  Yol.  29,  October,  1857.  At  the 
head  of  this  article  is  placed  the  title  of  the  Dis- 
courses of  Professor  Lee,  of  Dublin,  on  the  Inspiration 
of  Holy  Scripture ;  of  which  the  writer  says:  "In 
our  number  for  April  [1857]  we  expressed  a  high 
opinion  of  the  general  merits  of  this  work,  and  our 
conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  doctrine  which  it  is  de- 
signed to  explain  and  defend.  We  wish  now  to  call 
attention  to  the  subject  of  which  it  treats."  It  is  some- 
what startling  to  read  in  the  "  short  notice"  of  April, 
that  Mr.  Lee's  "own  theory" — the  'dynamical' —  "is 
precisely  that  of  the  old  writers" — namely,  those  who 
held  the  *  mechanical'  theory  of  inspiration.  "It  is  a 
mere  change  of  phraseology.  There  is  no  difference 
either  as  to  the  nature  of  the  influence  of  irhich  the  sacred 
writers  were  the  subjects,  or  as  to  the  resulting  authority  of 
u:hat  they  wrote"  (P.  328.)  But  as  the  October  article 


80  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

relates  no  further  to  Mr.  Lee's  work  than  as  above 
quoted,  let  us  see  whether  it  is  altogether  consistent 
with  itself  in  its  definitions,  doctrines,  and  use  of  terms. 

1.  The  writer  of  the  article,  as  every  reader  of  the 
work  which  contains  it  would  of  course  expect,  be- 
lieves the  holy  Scriptures,  and  each  and  every  part  of 
them  to  be  the  infallible  word  of  God.     Thus  :  "  Faith 
in  Christ  of  necessity  involves  faith  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  faith  in  the  Scriptures  involves  the  belief  that  they 
are  the  word  of  God  and  not  the  word  of  man.     They 
come  to  us  in  the  name  of  God ;  they  profess  to  be  His 
word  ;  they  claim  Divine  authority.  .  .  In  saying  that 
the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God,  we  mean  that  He  is  its 
author ;   that  He  says  whatever  the  Bible   says.  .  . 
What  the  Scriptures  teach  is  to  be  believed,  not  on  the 
authority  of  Moses  or  the  prophets,  or  of  the  apostles 
and  evangelists,  but  on  the  authority  of  God,  who  used 
the  sacred  writers  as   His  organs  of  communication. 
The  Bible  is  the  product  of  one  mind.     It  is  one 
Book."    (Pp.  662,  663.)    These  sentences  undoubtedly 
mean  just  what  they  say.     The  verbal  statements,  the 
thoughts  and  words,  which,  as  presented  to  the  eye  in 
written  characters,  are  called  the  Scriptures,  are  the 
word  of  God,  and  in  no  sense  or  degree  the  word  of 
man.     They  are  the  product  of  one  Mind.     Their  sole 
author   is   God,   who   breathed,    inspired,    transferred 
them,  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers,  as  the  or- 
gans through  which  he  communicated  them  to  the 
world. 

2.  He  holds  in  the  strictest  sense  their  plenary  inspir- 
ation.    "  Faith  in  the  Scriptures  as  the  word  of  God,  is 
faith  in  their  plenary  inspiration.     That  is,  it  is  the 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  81 

persuasion  that  they  are  not  the  product  of  the  fallible 
intellect  of  man,  but  of  the  infallible  intellect  of  God." 
(661.)  The  wold  iiroduct  in  this  passage  doubtless  re- 
lates not  to  the  written  characters  or  the  act  of  writing, 
but  to  that  which  the  prophets,  by  their  own  proper 
acts,  committed  to  writing ;  that  which  was  as  truly 
the  word  of  God  when  they  uttered  it  vocally  and  be- 
fore they  wrote  it,  as  after  they  performed  the  manual 
act  of  uttering  it  by  writing.  It  was  what  He  said  in 
articulate  audible  words,  or  what  He  as  effectually 
conveyed  to  their  intelligent  consciousness  by  inspira- 
tion. Inspiration  is  here  affirmed,  not  of  the  writers, 
but  of  what  they  wrote  ;  according  to  the  inspired  tes- 
timony that  all  Scripture  is  Theopneustos,  given,  im- 
parted, by  the  act  of  God,  breathing,  inspiring  it  into 
the  minds  of  the  writers.  The  act  of  writing  was,  we 
presume  to  say,  a  distinct  voluntary  human  act.  It 
was  sometimes  performed  not  by  the  prophets  and 
apostles  themselves,  but  by  scribes  whom  they  em- 
ployed and  to  whom  they  dictated.  "  Baruch  wrote 
from  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah  all  the  words  of  the  Lord, 
which  He  had  spoken  unto  him.  .  .  And  the  princes 
asked  Baruch,  saying :  Tell  us  now.  How  didst  tliou 
write  all  these  words  at  his  mouth  ?  Then  Baruch 
answered  them,  He  pronounced  all  these  words  unto 
me  with  his  mouth,  and  I  wrote  them  with  ink  in  a 
Book."  (Jer.  36.)  So  the  Epistle  to  the  Eomans, 
though  Paul  received  it  by  inspiration,  was  not  written 
by  his  hand,  but  by  that  of  Tertius.  (Rom.  16.)  The 
like,  probably,  was  the  case  with  all  his  other  epistles, 
except  those  to  Philemon  and  the  Galatians.  But  he 

added  to  each  either  his  autograph  salutation,  or  bene- 

4* 


82  THE    PLENAKY    INSPIKATION 

diction.  No  inspiration,  of  any  kind  or  degree,  was  ne- 
cessary to  the  act  of  writing  the  original  texts,  any  more 
than  afterwards  to  the  act  of  copying  what  had  been 
written ;  and  it  is  impossible  that  the  external  writing, 
the  characters  previously  inscribed  with  ink,  should 
have  been  Theopneustos — breathed  by  the  Divine  act 
into  the  minds  of  the  Apostles.  Nor  does  it  seem  either 
congruous  or  safe  to  suppose  that  the  original  writers 
were  preserved  from  error  in  the  act  of  writing,  in  any 
other  way,  than  that  in  which  the  copyists  who  suc- 
ceeded them  were  preserved — namely,  by  the  influence 
of  adequate  motives — motives  supplied  by  the  nature 
and  importance  of  the  task,  and  by  the  ordinary  en- 
lightening, restraining,  guiding,  gracious  influences  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  For,  if  an  extraordinary  supernatural 
influence  was  necessary,  to  guide  and  preserve  from 
error,  the  prophets  themselves  in  the  act  of  writing 
what  they  had  received,  and  were  intelligently  con- 
scious of  in  their  own  minds,  and  was  equally  necessary 
to  guide  and  preserve  from  error  the  scribes  to  whom 
they  dictated  by  word  of  mouth,  why  should  not  such 
extraordinary,  supernatural  influence,  have  been 
equally  necessary  to  those  scribes  whose  copies,  instead 
of  the  originals,  have  come  down  to  us  ?  And,  unless 
it  can  be  shown  that  such  extraordinary,  supernatural 
influence  was  exerted  on  their  faculties,  how  can  we 
be  certain  that  the  words  which  they  wrote,  are  the 
very  words  of  God — the  very  words  which  were  im- 
parted to  the  prophets  by  inspiration  of  God  ?  If  the 
prophets  and  apostles,  and  the  scribes  whom  they  em- 
ployed, were,  in  the  act  of  writing,  influenced  other- 
wise than  as  rational  beings  in  the  ordinary  use  of 


OF   THE    HOLY"   SCRIPTURES.  83 

their  faculties  as  free  agents — that  is,  by  motives — if 
they  were  subjected  to  a  different,  an  extraordi- 
nary supernatural  influence,  that  different  influence 
must  have  superseded,  intercepted,  suspended,  their 
voluntary,  intelligent,  and  conscious  exercise  of  their 
faculties,  and  must  have  operated  on  them  as  pas- 
sive instruments,  or  machines;  and  our  confidence 
in  the  infallibility  of  what  they  wrote  must  in  that 
case  depend  on  the  supposition  that  such  a  mechani- 
cal influence  was  exerted.  And  since  the  like  did 
not  happen  to  the  copyists,  we  are  left  without  the 
original  and  necessary  ground  of  confidence  in  the 
verity  and  accuracy  of  the  text. 

But  while  we  know  that,  without  intercepting  or  in- 
fringing the  intelligent  and  voluntary  exercise  of  man's 
faculties,  the  influence  of  motives — considerations  intel- 
ligently apprehended  by  the  agent — is  a  ground  of  ab- 
solute certainty  with  respect  to  his  intelligent  acts,  we 
know  nothing  of  the  supposed  mechanical  influence 
either  as  a  ground  of  certainty  or  in  any  other  respect. 
And  if  such  supernatural  influence  on  the  faculties  of 
the  sacred  writers,  is  the  *  guidance'  so  much  insisted 
on  by  the  writer  of  the  article  now  under  considera- 
tion, and  by  other  writers,  as  the  ground  of  our  confi- 
dence in  the  accuracy,  verity,  and  infallibility  of  the 
sacred  text,  and  as  exclusively  constituting,  or  being 
of  the  very  essence  of,  inspiration,  then  we  submit,  that 
farther  light  is  needed  concerning  the  doctrine  of 
the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  If  the 
Scriptures  "are  in  truth  the  word  of  God,"  if  lie  is  their 
sole  author,  if  they  are  the  product  solely  of  His  one 
mind,  then  they  are  in  no  sense  the  product  of  finite, 


THE   PLEXARY    INSPIRATION 


dev  at,  ere.  :  1  minds  :  r.::d  tlieir  infallibility 
be  ascribed  to  Him  as  their  author  and  inspirer.  and 
not  to  a  supposed  mechanical  influence  exerted  on  men 
in  their  ac&s  :  writing  . 

— 

The  writer  of  the  article  exhibits  the  follow!: 

DG  of  inspiration.     Referring  to  the  iaith  of  all 

Christians  of  eve      .  _    .-.nd  name.  Greeks  and  Lati:  s. 

.nanists  and  Protestants,  he  savs  :  "All  aeree  in  &iv- 

%'  \—  ^/ 

ing.  that  every  thing  in  the  Bible  which  purports  to 
the  w  i  .     i  God.  or  which  is  uttered  bv  those  whom 

* 

He  use  ~.  BE  Il:s  messengers,  is  :  be  received  with  the 
san:  :"..::h  and  submission.  t?-5  though  sj>:>Jcen  directly  by 
the  lip?  This  is  the  doctrine  ~  enary 

as  opposed  to  the  theory  of     .::  ..      ;  miration  ..... 
.  .trine  of  th;  C-Mix^h  on  this  subjec-t  has  ever 
;   ...  :ie  thoughts  and  language,  the  substance  and 

-  :  rm  of  Scripture  are  given  by  inspirati.  f  (r:d: 
tha:  the  holy  men  of  old  SPAKF.  as  thev  were  moved 

»  » 

by  the  Holy  Ghost  The  Apostle  Paul,  in  writing  to 
the  C:rinthians.  sets  forth  this  doctrine  in  the  clea: 

liofht     H     teaches,    fast   :is  t3  the  source  of  the  tru: 

_ 

which  he  taught  ne_  :  I  .  ti:at  they  were  not  derived 
from  human  reason,  or  the  wisdom,  of  men.  They 
were  neither  the  product  of  his  own  intelligence,  nor 
communicated  to  him  bv  other  men.  On  the  contrarv, 

*.  «    ' 

what  he  taught  had  never  entered  into  the  mind  of  m 

^_ 

to  conceive.  This  is  his  negative  statement.  Affirm  a- 
:.  ?ly,  he  says  these  truths  were  ^:d  to  him  by  the 
H:ly  Spirit,  who  alone  is  inpetent  to  make  known 
the  things  of  God,  Secondly.  :.s  t  the  mode  of  com- 
municating these  trutiis.  it  was  not  in  words  which 
man's  wisdom  teaches,  or  which  his  own  mind  sug- 


OF   THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURE-. 

-ted,  but  in  words  taught  by  the  Holy  Ghost.7' 
(Pp.  664,  665.) 

Here  we  are  briefly  and  emphatically  taught,  that 
both  the  thoughts  and  words  which  constitute  what  is 

c^ 

written  as  Holy  Scripture,  were  imparted  from  God — 
given  by  inspiration  of  God.  Xeither  the  truths, 
thoughts,  or  words  were  derived  from  human  rea  - .  - 

O  ' 

or  man's  wisdom  ;  they  were  revealed,  taught,  impart- 
ed by  the  Holy  Spirit.  On  this  ground  there  is  no 
difficulty  in  understanding  that  the  words  which  w 
written  were  in  reality  the  words  of  God ;  for  tl. 
were  the  identical  words  which  were  conveyed  to  the 
writers  by  inspiration,  and  which  the  Spirit  moved 
them  to  speak  and  write.  They,  personally,  had  no- 
thing whatever,  more  or  less,  to  do  in  the  selection  of 
the  thoughts  or  of  the  words.  This,  also,  is  what  the 
article  elsewhere  teaches.  "  The  sacred  writers  are 
not  the  real  authors  of  the  Book.  In  point  of  feet 
they  disappear,  and  God  takes  their  place."  (P.  680.) 
"  All  inspiration  in  the  Scriptural  sense  of  the  doctrine 
is  denied,  if  the  v:ords  of  the  sacred  writers  were  not 
determined  by  the  Spirit  of  God."  (682.)  "  How  any 
one  can  hold  that  the  sacred  writers  were  inspired  as  to 
their  thoughts,  but  not  as  to  their  language,  is  to  us 
perfectly  incomprehensible.  The  denial  of  verbal  in- 
spiration is  in  our  view  the  denial  of  all  inspiration,  in 
the  Scriptural  sense  of  the  doctrine.  Xo  man  can  have 
a  wordless  thought,  any  more  than  there  can  be  a  form- 
less flower.  By  a  law  of  our  present  constitution,  we 
think  in  words,  and  as  far  as  our  consciousness  goes,  it 
is  as  impossible  to  infant  thought.?  into  the  mind  v:ithout 
words,  as  it  is  to  bring  men  into  the  world  without 


86  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

bodies."  (677.)  "  The  contents  of  the  Scriptures  are  not 
derived  from  the  human  mind  ;  they  are  not  due  to  its 
elevation  and  purity,  but  are  derived  from  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  consequently  the  authority  of  its  teachings 
is  not  human  but  Divine.  The  Bible  is  the  word  of 
God,  and  not  the  word  of  man."  (698.)  It  would  be 
difficult  to  express,  more  clearly  than  these  passages 
do,  the  Scriptural  doctrine  of  plenary  Divine  Inspira- 
tion, as  meaning  the  infusion,  transference,  inspiration, 
of  the  thoughts  and  words  of  Scripture  into  the  minds 
of  the  sacred  penmen,  to  be  by  them  recorded  word 
for  word  as  they  received  them,  as  the  words  of  God 
selected,  determined,  and  imparted  by  Him,  and  not  in 
any  sense  as  theirs,  or  of  their  selection. 

But  these  definitions  and  expressions  appear  to  be  in- 
consistent with  other  definitions  of  inspiration  which 
occur  in  other  portions  of  the  article.  The  writer  un- 
doubtedly believes  every  word  of  Scripture  to  be  the 
word  of  God  in  the  same  sense  that  every  word  audibly 
spoken  by  Him  is  His,  and  that  the  words  which  a 
man  speaks  of  himself,  of  his  own  authority,  and  of 
his  own  affairs,  are  his.  Yet  it  will  appear  from  the 
definitions  quoted  below,  that  he  also  believes  it  to 
have  been  the  sole  object  and  effect  of  inspiration 
to  guide  the  sacred  writers  and  make  them  infallible  in 
the  selection  and  utterance  of  the  words  which  they 
wrote — infallible  in  the  choice  and  utterance  of  the 
words  of  Scripture.  Of  course,  on  that  supposition, 
they  must  have  originated  or  selected  the  thoughts  as 
well  as  the  words,  for,  as  he  says,  "It  is  impossible  that 
the  thoughts  should  be  infused — inspired  into  their 
minds  without  words,"  and,  there  being  no  wordless 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  87 

thoughts,  the  thoughts  which  they  selected  words  to 
express,  could  not  have  been  supplied  from  without, 
but  must  have  originated  within  them.  "  The  object  of 
inspiration  is  to  render  men  infallible  in  communicating 

truth  to  others The  authors  of  the  historical 

books  of  the  Bible,  in  many  cases,  needed  no  super- 
natural communication  of  the  facts  which  they  record- 
ed. All  that  they  required  was  to  be  rendered  infallible 
as  narrators.  (665.)  ...  The  simple  end  and  ob- 
ject of  inspiration  was  to  render  the  sacred  ivriters  in- 
fallible. (667.)  ...  The  view  every  where  presented  in 
the  New  Testament  of  the  inspiration  of  the  ancient  pro- 
phets, supposes  them  to  be  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  the  selection  of  the  words  which  they 
employ.  David  sat  down  to  portray  the  sufferings  of 
a  child  of  God,  as  in  Psalm  22  :  unconsciously  to  him- 
self, it  may  be,  he  was  led  to  select  such  figures  and  use 
such  language,  as  to  present  a  portrait  of  the  suffering 
Messiah,  recognized  at  once  as  a  Divine  delineation." 
(P.  676.)  Of  course,  on  this  supposition,  David  must 
have  originated  and  selected  the  prophetic  and  other 
thoughts,  as  well  as  the  words  and  figures.  If  inspira- 
tion did  not  convey  both  thoughts  and  words  to  the 
sacred  writers,  but  only  guided  them  in  the  exercise  of 
their  faculties,  then,  however  infallible  the  guidance, 
the  words  which  they  selected,  and  the  thoughts  equally 
with  the  words,  must,  for  that  reason,  have  been  their 
words.  It  is  inconceivable  that  their  being  guided  to 
select  and  write  them  with  infallible  accuracy,  should 
hinder  their  being  their  words,  any  more  than  select- 
ing and  writing  proper  words  under  the  influence  of 
ordinary  motives  should  hinder  their  being  their 


88  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

words.  Their  acts  would  be  as  free  and  involve  their 
responsibility,  and  be  as  much  their  personal  acts,  and 
make  the  words  as  truly  and  exclusively  their  words, 
in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  "  It  is,"  as  the  writer 
observes,  "a  fundamental  principle  of  Scriptural 
theology,  that  a  man  may  be  infallibly  guided  in  his 
free  acts."  (P.  678.)  "Words  then,  selected  by  a  moral 
agent,  acting  freely  under  infallible  guidance,  are 
his  words,  by  as  high  and  exclusive  a  title  as  his  acts 
are  his. 

Again  :  "  The  whole  end  and  office  of  inspiration  is 
to  preserve  the  sacred  writers  from  error  in  teaching." 
(P.  685.)  This  would  seem  clearly  to  imply  that  what 
they  taught  was  not  supplied,  imparted,  given  by  in- 
spiration. They  might  consistently  with  their  free- 
dom in  selecting  and  determining  what  to  write,  be  in- 
fallibly guided  so  as  to  teach  no  error,  without  receiv- 
ing, in  any  manner,  from  any  external  source,  that 
which  they  uttered  in  writing.  But  how  in  that  case 
could  the  words  which  they  recorded  be  the  words  of 
God  ?  Does  the  fact  that  a  writing  is  absolutely  true 
and  free  from  error,  make  it  the  word  of  God  ?  And 
how  on  this  view  of  the  end  and  office  of  inspiration, 
did  the  sacred  writers  become  possessed  of  those  super- 
natural truths  which  had  not  been  revealed  by  audible 
vocal  utterances  ?  Is  there  no  difference,  is  there  not 
a  palpable  and  world-wide  difference,  between  saying 
that  "  the  writers  of  the  Scriptures  were  merely  con- 
trolled by  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  choice  of  the  words 
which  they  employed  in  communicating  Divine  truth," 
and  saying,  "that  the  very  words  with  the  thoughts 
which  they  uttered  vocally  and  in  writing,  were  con- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  89 

veyed  to  tlieir  minds  by  inspiration"  ?  Is  a  man's  be- 
ing preserved  from  error  in  teaching,  the  same  thing  as 
his  being  supplied  with  the  very  words  he  was  to 
teach  ? 

The  inconsistency  above  referred  to  further  appears 
in  what  the  writer  says  of  the  nature  and  effects  of  in- 
spiration. "  As  to  the  nature  of  inspiration,  we  are  en- 
tirely ignorant ;  that  is,  we  have  no  knowledge  what- 
ever of  the  mode  of  the  Spirit's  operation.  We  only 
know  its  effects.  .  .  .  We  know  the  effects  of  inspira- 
tion by  the  declarations  of  the  Scriptures,  and  by  the 
exhibition  of  those  effects  in  the  Bible  itself.  From 
these  sources  we  learn :  1.  That  the  effect  of  inspira- 
tion was  to  render  its  subject  the  infallible  organ  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  communicating  truth,  in  such  a  sense  as 
that  what  was  said  or  written  by  an  inspired  man  the 
Holy  Ghost  said  or  wrote.  Hence  the  formulas, 
"  Isaiah  or  David  said,"  and  "  the  Holy  Ghost  said," 
mean  precisely  the  same  thing,  and  are  in  fact  inter- 
changed as  synonymous  in  the  Sacred  Scriptures."  (666.) 
But  is  it  correct  to  regard  the  formula,  "  David  said," 
as  importing  precisely  what  the  formula,  "the  Holy 
Ghost  said,"  imports  ?  Did  David  speak  what  is 
recorded  in  Scripture,  in  the  same  sense  as  the  Spirit 
spake  in  and  by  him  ?  Are  the  words  his  as  really 
and  in  the  same  sense  that  they  are  the  words  of  God  ? 
Is  there  not  something  necessarily  to  be  understood 
and  supplied  in  the  one  case,  which  is  not  necessary  in 
the  other  ?  Does  David  say  any  thing  in  Scripture 
which  had  not  been  given  him  by  inspiration  of  God, 
any  thing  in  his  own  name,  any  thing  on  his  own 


90  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

authority,  any  thing,  except  as  an  instrument,  a  messen- 
ger, a  servant,  in  conveying  the  word  of  God  ? 

But  what  does  the  writer  mean  by  inspiration  render- 
ing a  prophet  the  infallible  organ  of  the  Holy  G-host 
in  communicating  truth  ?  Does  he  mean  that  the  pro-i 
phet  was  passive  as  a  material  organ — a  trumpet, 
through  which  articulate  words  or  intelligible  sounds 
are  uttered,  with  infallible  accuracy  ?  Or  does  he 
mean  as  in  the  passages  previously  cited,  that  he  was 
infallibly  guided  "in  the  selection  of  the  words,"  which 
he  uttered  ?  Was  he  an  organ  in  the  same  sense  that 
the  ambassador  of  a  king  is  his  organ,  in  conveying  his 
messages,  word  for  word,  to  his  revolted  subjects  or  to  a 
foreign  prince — the  same  sense  that  Moses  was  the  or- 
gan of  the  God  of  Israel  in  repeating  to  the  people 
word  for  word,  the  verbal  messages  which  he  received 
from  Him  ;  the  intelligent  receiver  from  God,  arid  ut- 
terer  to  men,  of  intelligible  messages  in  words  intelli- 
gible and  familiar  to  him  ?  If  this  is  the  sense  in 
which  the  sacred  writers  were  organs  of  the  Spirit,  then 
inspiration  means  the  impartation  to  them  of  the  very 
words  they  were  to  utter,  whether  vocally  or  in  writing. 
They  no  more  selected  or  had  any  agency  or  guidance 
in  the  selection  of  the  words  which  they  officially  ut- 
tered, than  a  regal  ambassador  selects  the  words  which 
he  is  commissioned  and  sent  to  utter.  They  were  in 
no  sense  their  words,  any  more  than  the  decrees  of  a 
king  are  the  decrees  of  a  crier  who  proclaims  them,  or 
than  the  words  of  a  master  are  the  words  of  his  servant 
to  whom  they  are  addressed. 

The  writer  of   the  article  under  consideration,  un- 
doubtedly believes  that  all  the  words  of  Scripture  are 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTUEES.  91 

verily  the  words  of  God.  He  avers  this  frankly  and 
explicitly  over  and  over  again.  "They  claim  to  be  the 
word  of  God :  they  assume  to  have  Divine  authority. 
.  .  .  The  Bible  claims  to  be  the  word  of  God.  This 
claim  is  enforced  and  sustained,  not  only  by  the  im- 
measurable superiority  of  the  truths  concerning  God 
and  his  Law,  concerning  man  and  his  destiny,  which  it 
contains,  but  by  the  absolutely  undeniable  supernatural 
character  of  its  contents.  It  presents  one  grand  concat- 
enated system  of  truth,  gradually  developed  during  fif- 
teen hundred  years,  implying  a  knowledge  of  God,  of 
man,  of  the  past,  and  of  the  future,  beyond  controversy 
superhuman  and  Divine.  This  book  which  thus  claims 
and  reveals  its  Divine  origin,  has  a  corresponding 
Divine  power."  (679.)  "  But  this  view  necessarily  sup- 
poses, that  the  sacred  writers  are  not  the  real  authors  of 
the  book.  .  .  .  Every  Christian  knows  that  when  he 
reads  the  Bible,  the  voice  to  which  he  listens,  to  which 
his  reason  bows,  his  conscience  submits,  and  to  which 
his  inmost  soul  responds,  which  calms  his  fears,  which 
illumines,  purifies,  and  elevates  him  above  the  world,  is 
not  the  voice  of  man.  But  if  the  voice  of  God,  it  must 
be  true.  The  Scriptures  must  be  infallible.  It  is  the 
Bible,  the  Bible  as  a  book,  the  whole  Bible  from 
Genesis  to  Revelation,  which  reveals  itself  as  Divine." 
(680.)  And  yet  he  seems  as  explicitly  to  hold  that  the 
Scriptures  are  the  voice  of  man  in  the  same  sense  that 
they  are  the  voice  of  God — that  man  speaks  in  them 
in  the  same  sense  that  the  Holy  Ghost  speaks. 

The  difficulty,  the  inconsistency,  verbal  and  real, 
results  from  the  writer's  erroneous  apprehension  of  the 
nature  and  affect  of  inspiration.  He  infers  from  what 


92  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

lie  takes  to  be  an  effect  of  inspiration,  that  inspiration 
itself  is  of  the  nature  of  guidance.  From  the  fact  that 
the  sacred  penmen  wrote  correctly  the  very  words 
which  behooved  to  be  written,  he  infers  that  in  the  act 
of  writing  they  were  rendered  infallible  by  inspiration, 
"infallible  as  narrators,"  "infallible  in  communicating 
truth  to  others,"  infallible  "in  the  selection  of  the 
words  which  they  employed."  He  knows  and  heartily 
believes,  that  the  words,  as  written,  were  the  infallible 
words  of  God.  But  they  were  written  by  men,  and 
therefore  he  thinks  that  the  men  must  have  been 
"  rendered  infallible"  to  insure  their  writing  the  words 
correctly.  He  argues  that  "  if  inspiration  be  simply 
that  influence  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  by  which  men 
were  rendered  infallible,  then  there  is  no  difference  as 
to  correctness  and  authority  between  one  portion  of  the 
Bible  and  another.  There  can  be  no  degrees  in  infalli- 
bility ;  and  therefore  no  degrees  in  inspiration  ...  in 
the  attribute  of  infallibility  the  sacred  writers  were  on 
a  par."  (P.  668.)  In  his  use  of  terms  he  rests  the 
doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Scriptures  not  on  the 
fact  that  they  consist  of  the  words  of  God  recorded,  but 
on  the  fact,  real  or  supposed,  that  the  writers  were 
rendered  infallible  in  selecting  and  recording  the  words. 
He  labors  this  point  earnestly  and  variously,  forgetting 
that  what  they  represented  in  written  characters,  ex- 
isted in  their  minds,  was  present  to  their  intelligent 
consciousness,  as  the  infallible  word  of  God,  before  they 
uttered  it  vocally  or  in  writing — that  the  thoughts  to 
be  expressed,  and  the  words  coevally  and  jointly  with 
the  thoughts,  must  have  been  consciously  in  their 
minds  with  every  attribute  of  infallibility  and  Divine 


OF   THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  93 

authority  which  they  possessed  after  they  were  uttered 
by  mouth  or  pen.  For  that  which  they  recorded  was 
the  word  of  God  given  by  His  inspiration.  No  infalli- 
bility or  other  attribute  could  have  been  added  to  it  by 
their  asrencv  as  organs  of  communication.  But  let  us 

CJ  c,  CJ 

hear  what  he  says  in  support  of  his  view:  "Verbal 
inspiration,  or  that  influence  of  the  Spirit  which  con- 
trolled the  sacred  writers  in  the  selection  of  their  words, 
allowed  them  perfect  freedom  within  the  limits  of  truth. 
They  were  kept  from,  error,  and  guided  to  the  use  of 
words  which  expressed  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  but 
within  these  limits  they  were  free  to  use  such  language, 
and  to  narrate  such  circumstances  as  suited  their  oicn  ta*i* 
or  purposes.'''1  (678.)  This  passage,  if  we  understand 
it,  teaches  that  the  human  agents,  notwithstanding  the 
supposed  control  and  guidance  of  inspiration,  had,  as 
men,  a  discretion  in  the  choice  of  the  words  which  they 
used,  and  in  the  choice  of  the  thoughts  and  the  subjects 
which  they  introduced  into  the  Scriptures.  It  was  at 
their  option  as  men,  "  to  narrate  such  circumstances  as 
suited  their  taste  or  purposes."  The  choice  was  their 
act  as  men  in  the  free  and  intelligent  exercise  of  their 

\ / 

faculties.     The  control  and  guidance  did  not  interfere 

O 

with  the  free  exercise  of  their  faculties.  The  choice 
was  their  act  by  every  consideration  which  distin- 
guishes any  human  act  from  a  Divine  act.  Whatever 
it  suited  their  taste  or  their  purposes  to  insert,  they 
might  insert  at  discretion,  provided  it  was  true.  On 
this  point  they  were  controlled  and  guided.  The  legi- 
timate inference,  we  presume,  must  be  that  the  Holy 
Scriptures  are  the  word  of  God  not  because  He  spoke 


94  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

them,  but  because  what  they  assert  is  true,  the  sacred 
penmen  .having  been  kept  from  error  in  writing  them. 
Again :   "  Inspiration  being  an  influence  by  which  a 
man  was  so  guided  in  the  exercise  of  his  natural  facul- 
ties, as  that  what  he  thought  and  said  should  express 
the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  it  follows  that  the  individuality 
of  its  subject  was  fully  preserved.     His  character  was 
not  changed  by  his  inspiration.     He  was  not  thereby 
rendered  more  refined  or  cultivated,  more  intellectual 
or  logical,  more  impassioned  or  eloquent.     He  retained 
all  his  peculiarities  as  a  thinker  and  writer.     If  a  He- 
brew, he  wrote  the  Hebrew  language.     If  Greek  was 
his  ordinary  language,  he  wrote  Greek.     If  he  lived  in 
the  time  of  Moses  or  Isaiah,  he  wrote  Hebrew  in  its 
purity.     If  he  belonged  to  the  time  of  the  captivity,  he 
wrote  Hebrew  with  all  the  idiomatic  and  grammatical 
peculiarities  which  the  language  had  at  that  period  as- 
sumed.    If  he  wrote  Greek,  it  was  the  Greek  which 
he  and  his  contemporaries  were  accustomed  to  use. 
The  apostles  did  not  use  the  Greek  of  Athens,  but  of 
Palestine.      They  wrote   as   Jews,    using   the   Greek, 
modified  by  their  Jewish  training.     These  are  facts, 
and  they  are  facts  which  must  determine  our  views  of 
the  nature  of  inspiration."     (P.  678.)     Now  all  this  is 
perfectly  consistent  with  what  we  allege  and  rely  on, 
both  in  the  former  and  present  volume,  in  support  of 
our  view  of  the  nature  and  effect  of  inspiration :  namely, 
1.  That  the  thoughts  which  are  expressed  in  Scripture 
were  theopneustoi,  breathed,  inspired,  of  God  into  the 
minds  of  the  sacred  penmen.     2.  That  they  were  in- 
spired into  their  minds  in  words,  because  they  could 
no  otherwise  have  been  conscious  of  them.     3.  That 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  95 

the  words  were  of  their  native  or  accustomed  language, 
and  such  in  style  and  idiom,  culture  and  peculiarities, 
as  they  were  familiar  with,  and  would  naturally  use  to 
express  the  same  thoughts,  for  the  very  reason  that 
they  and  their  contemporaries  understood  those  words 
with  those  peculiarities,  just  as  when  used  in  their  in- 
tercourse with  each  other.  4.  That  being  so  inspired 
into  their  minds,  they  were,  to  their  intelligent  con- 
sciousness, the  words  of  God  as  really  and  perfectly  as 
after  they  had  exercised  their  faculties  in  the  act  of  re- 

«/ 

cording  or  otherwise  uttering  them ;  and  as  such  were 
infallible  and  needed  no  special  supernatural  guiding 
influence  to  make  them  so.  5.  That  the  Divine  act  by 
which  the  thoughts  and  words  were  inspired  into  the 
minds  of  the  prophets,  did  not  suspend  or  derange  their 
faculties  or  their  ordinary  exercise  of  them,  or  affect 

t/ 

them  otherwise  than  they  were  affected  by  receiving — 
hearing  or  reading — the  thoughts  and  words  of  their 
fellow-men ;  that  they  were  in  fact  as  passive  in  the 
one  case  as  in  the  other,  and  had  no  more  agency  in 

t/ 

selecting  either  the  thoughts  or  words  in  one  case  than 

^j  <— ' 

in  the  other.  6.  That  this  is  not  theory,  but  the  ex- 
press doctrine  of  the  Scriptures  themselves — namely, 
that  the  contents,  the  thoughts  and  words  which  con- 
stitute the  Scriptures,  are  theopneustoi — given,  im- 
parted to  the  sacred  writers,  by  inspiration  of  God. 
This  Scripture  doctrine  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the 
constitution  of  man,  the  natural  use  of  his  faculties,  and 
all  the  phenomena  of  the  case,  and  wholly  supersedes 
the  necessity  of  a  theory  of  supernatural  guidance.  It 
is  no  more  mysterious  or  remarkable  that  thoughts  in 
words  should  be  conveyed  from  the  Divine  rnind  to 


96  THE    PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

man  by  inspiration,  than  that  they  should  be  conveyed 
by  vocal  utterance,  as  they  undeniably  were  to  Moses 
and  others,  or  than  that  one  man's  thoughts  should  be 
vocally  conveyed,  in  his  words,  to  other  men.  And 
if  a  large  proportion  of  all  the  words  of  Scripture  are 
the  words  of  Grod  because  He,  personally,  spoke  them  ; 
if  all  the  facts  and  doctrines  taught  by  the  Apostle 
Paul  in  his  preaching  and  his  writings  were  revealed  to 
him  by  the  Holy  Spirit ;  if  the  words  which  he  used 
were  not  his  or  any  man's,  but  were  the  words  of  the 
Spirit;  if  the  Spirit  could  convey  intelligence,  doctrines, 
thoughts,  in  words,  otherwise  than  by  audible  utter- 
ance ;  and  if  all  Scripture  was  theopneustos,  that  is,  if 
all  the  words  recorded  were  given  to  the  writers  by 
inspiration  of  God,  then  the  doctrine  of  this  "article" 
concerning  the  nature  of  inspiration,  and  concerning 
guidance  and  infallibility  as  its  effect,  is  erroneous  and 
inconsistent  alike  with  other  portions  of  the  article,  and 
with  the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures.  If  the  Divine 
Lawgiver  and  moral  Governor  of  men  determined  to 
administer  His  moral  system  over  the  fallen  race 
through  the  instrumentality  of  His  own  authoritative 
and  infallible  word,  and  in  perfect  conformity  to  every 
jot  and  tittle  of  its  meaning  as  His  word ;  then  as- 
suredly He  determined  beforehand  every  thought  and 
every  word  that  should  be  written  as  His  and  in  His 
name ;  and  conformably  to  His  own  account  of  His 
mode  of  communication,  we  are  bound  as  a  plain  in- 
duction from  the  premises,  to  conclude  that  in  some 
way,  worthy  of  Himself  and  of  the  infinite  importance 
of  the  subject,  He  would  convey  His  thoughts  in  His 
own  words  to  His  chosen  servants,  to  be  recorded  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES  97 

published  by  them.  It  is  in  derogation  of  His  attri- 
butes and  claims,  and  of  all  that  is  sacred  and  moment- 
ous in  the  subject,  to  suppose  that  He  would  leave  the 
insertion  or  omission  of  a  single  word,  thought,  or 
shade  of  thought,  to  the  taste,  purposes,  volition,  or 
discretion  of  the  writers.  The  propriety  and  force  of 
this  induction,  are  enhanced  by  the  consideration  that 
there  was  in  the  nature  of  the  case  no  necessity  of 
man's  selecting  words  for  Him.  He  could  and  did 
infallibly  convey  His  thoughts  to  men  by  articulate 
vocal  utterance — audibly  on  some  occasions,  in  dreams 
and  visions  on  others ;  and  all  alike  when  they  were 
to  be  written  by  breathing — inspiring — them  into  the 
minds  of  the  writers.  No  man  can  say  that  it  was  not 
as  competent  to  Him  to  inspire  all  the  words  that  are 
written,  as  any  of  them — the  history  of  the  creation, 
the  prophesy  of  Enoch,  the  moral  law,  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  or  the  Psalms,  the  Grospels,  and  Epistles. 

Doubtless  there  are  many  passages  of  Scripture,  like 
Paul's  greetings  and  salutations  to  individual  Christ- 
ians, acquaintances,  friends,  at  Korne,  at  Colosse  and 
elsewhere;  his  request  to  Timothy  to  bring  him  the 
cloak,  books,  and  parchments,  which  he  had  left  at 
Troas  with  Carpus ;  his  directions  to  Timothy  for  the 
preservation  of  his  health  ;  his  uncertainty  as  to  how 
many  converts  he  had  baptized  at  Corinth,  and  many 
others  expressive  of  the  personal  feelings,  acts,  senti- 
ments, good  wishes,  intentions,  purposes  of  the  writers. 
Such  passages  express  the  very  thoughts  which,  under 
like  circumstances,  the  same  writers  would  have  ex- 
pressed in  ordinary  uncanonical  letters.  They  actually 
had,  as  men,  the  feelings,  wishes,  sentiments,  intentions, 

5 


98  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

which  they  expressed.  But  what  of  that  ?  Does  that 
forbid  that  those  thoughts  should  be  divinely  real- 
ized to  their  intelligent  consciousness  by  inspiration, 
when  in  their  official  capacity  they  were  to  write  them 
as  part  of  Holy  Scripture  ?  Was  there  not  the  same 
necessity  that  these  particular  thoughts,  in  distinction 
from  all  the  other  thoughts  of  which  they  were  person- 
ally conscious,  should  be  divinely  selected  and  specially 
inspired  into  their  minds  to  fulfill  the  purposes  of  God 
as  moral  Governor,  that  there  was,  that  particular  his- 
torical facts  in  distinction  from  all  others,  concerning 
the  lives  and  acts  of  Abraham,  Jacob,  Joseph,  David, 
and  other  Scripture  characters  should  be  so  selected 
and  inspired?  And  if  He  actually  determined  and 
selected  what  should  be  written  in  His  name,  on  His 
authority,  and  as  His  word,  would  not  His  act,  verbally 
inspiring  such  particular  personal  thoughts  into  the 
minds  of  the  sacred  penmen,  make  the  words  which 
He  used  His  words,  as  truly  as  if  He  spoke  them  audi- 
bly, or  as  the  words  which  He  used  on  any  occasion 
or  in  any  manner,  to  express  direct  revelations,  were 
His  words  ?  Does  the  nature  of  the  thoughts  to  be 
expressed  determine  whether  or  not  the  words  may  be 
His  ?  May  He  not  inspire  into  a  prophet's  mind  to  be 
written  in  Plis  name  and  as  His,  the  very  thoughts  and 
words,  private  and  peculiar  though  they  were,  which 
the  prophet  was  already  conscious  of?  Does  He  not 
know  the  inward  and  peculiar  thoughts  and  feelings 
of  all  men,  and  whether  an  infallible  report  and  ex- 
pression of  them  in  Scripture  would  fulfill  His  pur- 
poses? If  the  fact  that  a  prophet  was,  at  a  certain 
time,  under  certain  circumstances,  conscious  of  certain 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  99 

thoughts,  occasioned  by  his  personal  feelings,  emotions, 
desires,  intentions,  and  modified  by  his  peculiar  tastes, 
habits,  sensibilities,  education,  his  constitutional  apti- 
tudes, his  mental  or  physical  condition,  his  experience, 
his  trials,  anxieties,  joys  or  sorrows,  should  preclude 
those  thoughts  from  being,  at  the  time,  or  afterwards, 
specially  inspired  into  his  mind  to  be  expressed  by  him 
in  writing,  for  the  instruction,  edification,  warning,  or 
encouragement,  of  others ;  why  should  not  the  fact 
that  he  was  conscious  of  knowing  certain  truths  con- 
cerning past  and  passing  events,  the  history,  experi- 
ence, sayings  and  doings  of  his  contemporaries,  preclude 
those  truths  from  being  given  to  him  by  inspiration  of 
God,  to  be  written  on  His  authority,  in  His  words,  as 

t/   / 

part  of  Holy  Scripture  ? 

The  true,  conclusive,  Scriptural  solution  of  the  diffi- 
culty in  this  matter,  is  furnished,  we  apprehend,  not  by 
any  notion  of  infallible  guidance,  nor  by  any  distinc- 
tion between  Kevelation  and  Inspiration,  but  by  the 
Divine  declaration  that  all  Scripture  is  Theopneustos — 
all  alike  inbreathed,  imparted,  given  by  inspiration  of 
God,  and  therefore  all  alike  infallibly  of  His  au- 
thority— His  word.  He  determined  in  every  particu- 
lar what  should  be  written  in  His  name  and  published 
as  His  word,  and  to  make  it  infallibly  certain  that  just 
what  He  foresaw  to  be  necessary  to  the  objects  and 
issues  of  His  moral  sytem,  should  be  accurately  re- 
corded, He,  by  His  inspiring  acts,  conveyed  it  all  alike 
to  the  minds  of  those  whom  He  employed  to  record  it. 
We  have  the  same  ground  of  certainty  that  He  deter- 
mined all  of  it  in  every  particular,  that  we  have  that 
He  determined  any  of  it  in  any  particular.  He,  Him- 


100  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

self,  in  various  forms  and  aspects,  declares  it  all  alike 
to  be  His  word,  as  explicitly  as  He  declares  any  of  it 
to  be  His  word.  His  declaration  that  He  gave  it  all 
by  His  inspiring  efficiency,  necessarily  assigns  to  the 
writers  the  subordinate  ministerial  function  and  relation 
of  ambassadors,  messengers,  servants.  Moses,  and  others 
of  the  sacred  penmen,  were,  accordingly,  commanded  to 
speak,  and  to  write,  the  words  which  God  had  spoken 
to  them,  put  into  their  mouths,  conveyed  to  them  by 
special  messengers  angelic  and  human,  facts  and  doc- 
trines revealed  to  them  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  There  is 
no  hint  that  they  had  any  more  discretion,  or  any 
higher  function  in  one  case  than  in  another.  When  it 
is  said  of  the  prophets,  ever  and  anon  as  new  messages 
were  to  be  recorded,  that  "  the  word  of  the  Lord  came 
to  them,"  we  can  understand  no  less  than  that  the  ver- 
bal message  was  realized  to  their  intelligent  conscious- 
ness by  inspiration  of  God,  The  Hebrew  term  dabar, 
which  is  uniformly  employed  in  this  formula,  denotes, 
says  Olshausen,  '  the  revealing  utterance  of  God ' — that 
is,  the  articulate  vocal  utterance.  '  The  word  of  the  Lord 
came,  saying ' — the  prophet  heard  vocal  utterances,  the 
voice  of  the  Lord,  saying — do,  speak,  or  write,  this  or 
that. 

The  theory  which  the  writer  of  this  article  exhibits, 
concerning  the  nature  of  inspiration,  as  being  an  influ- 
ence which,  instead  of  conveying  thoughts  and  words 
to  the  sacred  penmen  to  be  recorded  by  them,  only 
guided  the  exercise  of  their  faculties  in  selecting  and 
recording  the  words  or  the  thoughts  and  words  of 
Scripture,  necessarily  requires  him  to  suppose  a  radical 
distinction  between  the  Divine  act  of  Eevelation  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  101 

the  Divine  act  of  inspiration ;  according  to  which  no 
truth  could  be  revealed,  disclosed,  imparted,  by  in- 
spiration. The  objects  and  effects  of  these  different 
acts  are  by  that  theory  wholly  distinct  and  different. 
" Inspiration,"  he  says,  "is  essentially  different  from 
revelation,  although  the  two  were  often  united  in  ex- 
perience, and  although  the  two  ideas  are  often  ex- 
pressed by  the  same  word.  The  object  of  the  latter — 
revelation — is  to  impart  knowledge  to  its  subjects  or  re- 
cipients; the  object  of  the  former — inspiration — is  to 
render  men  infallible  in  communicating  truth  to  others.'1'1 
(P.  665.)  We  need  not  dwell  on  this.  If  his  view  of 
the  nature  of  inspiration  is  erroneous  and  unscriptural, 
as  we  believe  and  have  endeavored  to  show,  then  this 
distinction  is  without  foundation.  To  reveal  is  to  dis- 
close— make  known — and  in  our  view  of  the  subject, 
it  was  just  as  necessary  that  God  should  disclose  to  the 
sacred  writers  precisely  which,  out  of  all  the  facts  and 
events  that  were  previously  known  to  them,  He  had 
selected  and  determined  to  have  recorded  in  His  name 
and  in  His  words,  as  it  was  that  He  should  disclose  to 
them  precisely  those  of  His  own  acts,  purposes,  com- 
mands, predictions,  which  He  had  determined  to  have 
recorded  in  Scripture.  And  it  is  because  He  often  did 
both  by  the  same  act  of  inspiration,  disclosing  super- 
natural, and  natural  or  previously  known  truths,  by 
one  and  the  same  act  and  influence,  that  the  two  ideas, 
that  of  revelation  and  that  of  inspiration,  are  united  in 
experience  and  expressed  by  the  same  word.  A  dis- 
closure by  inspiration  is  virtually,  and  as  to  its  object 
and  effect,  the  same  as  a  disclosure  by  audible  utter- 
ance, or  any  other,  or  conceivable  mode  of  revelation. 


102  THE   PLENARY  INSPIKATION 

How  on  this  theory  of  guidance  the  sacred  writers  be- 
came possessed  of  those  prophecies,  supernatural  truths, 
or  historical  truths  not  previously  known  to  them, 
which  were  not  made  known  to  them  by  what  the 
writer  denominates  revelation,  he  does  not  inform  us  ; 
and  we  rest  satisfied  with  the  inspired  declarations  of 
Paul,  that  the  mysteries,  the  doctrines,  all  that  he  knew 
and  uttered  in  his  official  character,  orally  and  in  writ- 
ing, was  revealed  to  him  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

In  the  belief  that  we  have  not  misunderstood  the 
meaning  of  the  language  of  this  article,  or,  by  quoting 
insulated  and  dissevered  passages,  misrepresented  it, 
we  are  constrained  to  regard  it  as  affording  the  strong- 
est evidence  we  have  hitherto  met  with,  of  the  exist- 
ence in  the  soundest  quarters,  among  the  ablest  men, 
the  ablest  theologians,  and  the  ablest  writers  of  the  day, 
of  unharmonious  and  unsatisfactory  views,  concerning 
this  most  important  subject.  The  nature  and  effect  of 
the  Divine  act  of  Inspiration — the  act  of  God  in  com- 
municating His  thoughts  and  His  words  to  the  creature 
whom  He  has  made  and  whom  He  upholds  and  gov- 
erns; His  thoughts  and  His  words  which  constitute 
that  creature's  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  life,  and  on 
which  his  destiny  depends — the  nature  and  effect  of 
that  Divine  act,  seem  to  be  inconsistently  defined,  at 
the  very  head-quarters  of  Biblical  knowledge  and 
Scriptural  orthodoxy.  Let  it  not  be  an  offense  that 
the  most  insignificant  pen  should  utter  this.  Owing 
especially  to  the  nature  of  the  modern  and  new-fledged 
philosophical  and  rationalistic  assaults  on  the  plenary 
Divine  inspiration,  infallibility,  and  authority  of  the 
sacred  oracles,  this  subject  demands  renewed  investi- 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  103 

gation  at  the  hands  of  the  official  magnates,  the  Nes- 
tors,  the  guardians  and  teachers  of  Christian  theology. 
It  will  not  do  to  retreat  behind  the  answers  to  an 
earlier  and  wholly  different  class  of  assaults.  It  will 
not  do  supinely  to  repose  on  the  undoubted  fact  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  will  teach  and  effectually  convince 
those  whom  He  renews  and  sanctifies,  that  the  Scrip- 
tures are  the  infallible  words  of  God,  to  be  believed 
solely  on  His  authority,  and  to  be  received  and  obeyed 
as  the  rule  of  faith  and  life,  prescribed  and  enjoined  by 
Him.  It  is  just  as  true  that  He  will  enlighten,  guide, 
and  enable  them  to  discern,  believe,  and  love  the  es- 
sential doctrines  of  theology  which  are  contained  in 
Scripture.  There  is,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  the 
same  reason  and  necessity  for  teaching  them  by  hu- 
man ministerial  instrumentality,  what  the  Scriptures 
teach  concerning  Inspiration,  as  for  teaching  them 
what  the  Scriptures  teach 'concerning  the  doctrine  of 
atonement,  or  any  other  essential  doctrine.  And 
therefore  the  Divine  wisdom  has  instituted  a  ministry 
expressly  to  preach  and  teach  what  He  has  disclosed 
in  His  written  word,  to  all  men  indiscriminately,  as  a 
means,  an  instrumentality  through  which  men  are  re- 
newed and  sanctified  by  the  Spirit.  It  will  not  do  to 
waive  the  subject  of  inspiration  as  in  its  nature  an  in- 
scrutable mystery.  The  Scriptures  treat  of  it.  Skep- 
tics and  heretics  assail  it.  Some  intelligible,  consistent, 
conclusive  statement  and  elucidation  of  it  is  loudly  de- 
manded. That  there  should  be  inscrutable  mysteries 
proposed  to  our  faith  in  the  sacred  oracles,  is  no  objec- 
tion to  them.  Without  such  mysteries  they  would  be 
incredible.  But  so  far  as  they  explain  and  illustrate 


104:  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

any  fact  or  doctrine,  it  is  relieved  from  the  condition 
of  inscrutable  mystery.  The  fact  and  the  doctrine  of 
plenary  Divine  inspiration  are  in  this  category.  The 
fact  is  stated  in  express  terms.  The  doctrine  is  vari- 
ously illustrated,  and,  in  part,  by  the  effect  ascribed  to 
the  Divine  act.  In  treating  of  that  effect  the  danger 
lies  in  construing  what  is  ascribed  to  the  act.  Did  it 
convey  intelligence  to  the  sacred  writers  ?  or  did  it  only 
guide  them  in  the  exercise  of  their  natural  faculties  ? 
No  two  things  can  be  more  different,  or  arise  from 
more  widely  different  apprehensions  of  an  efficient  act. 
To  illustrate  this,  a  further  reference  to  the  article  so 
long  under  consideration,  will  be  in  point.  "As  to  the 
nature  of  inspiration  we  are  entirely  ignorant ;  that  is, 
we  have  no  knowledge  whatever  of  the  mode  of  the 
Spirit's  operation.  We  only  know  its  effects.  The 
case  is  analogous  to  the  Divine  influence  in  the  work 
of  regeneration.  We  know  nothing  of  the  manner  in 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  imparts  spiritual  life  to  those 
previously  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins.  We  only  know 
that  the  effect  of  that  influence  is  to  convey  the  principle 
of  a  new  life.  So  we  know  nothing  as  to  how  the 
Spirit  operates  on  the  minds  of  those  whom  He  makes 
His  organs  in  communicating  Divine  truth."  (P.  666.) 
Now  beyond  a  doubt  there  is  a  certain  analogy  be- 
tween these  two  cases ;  but  it  is  not  between  the  two 
acts  in  respect  to  their  nature  or  source,  for  they  are 
both  alike  Divine  acts  of  the  same  agent ;  nor  is  it  be- 
tween the  effects  produced  as  to  their  nature  or  species, 
for  there  is  no  analogy  between  a  spiritual  life,  and 
any  effect  of  inspiration.  The  analogy  therefore  exists 
between  the  specific  manner  of  the  act  in  one  case,  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  105 

in  the  other.  The  specific  manner  of  the  act  was,  that 
of  communicating,  imparting,  conveying.  The  Divine 
act  in  regeneration,  as  the  writer  of  the  article  says, 
imparted  spiritual  life  —  conveyed  the  principle  of  a 
new  life.  Accordingly  the  Divine  act  of  inspira- 
tion breathed,  imparted,  conveyed  knowledge,  truths, 
thoughts,  words.  This  analogy  might  be  largely  con- 
firmed by  the  Scripture  use  of  terms.  The  same  He- 
brew word  which  is  translated  breathed,  to  signify  the 
impartation  of  natural  life,  is  translated  inspiration,  to 
signify  the  impartation  of  knowledge.  "  The  Lord 
God  .  .  .  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life ; 
and  man  became  a  living  soul."  (Gen.  2.)  "  There  is 
a  spirit  in  man  :  and  the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty 
giveth  them  understanding."  (Job  32.)  There  is,  we 
apprehend,  as  indubitable  evidence  that  the  Divine  act 
of  inspiration  conveyed  the  thoughts  and  words  which 
the  recipient  was  to  record  in  writing,  as  there  is  that 
the  act  of  regeneration  by  the  same  Divine  Person,  con- 
veyed the  principle  of  a  new  life,  which  the  recipient 
was  to  manifest  by  appropriate  acts,  dispositions,  and 
affections.  But  the  writer,  not  adverting  to  the  real 
point  of  analogy  in  the  case,  construes  that  which  the 
Scriptures  ascribe  to  the  act  of  inspiration — the  man- 
ner, object,  and  effect  of  the  act,  in  a  different  way — as 
not  conveying  any  thing,  but  as  merely  guiding  the 
recipient  in  the  exercise  of  his  natural  faculties. 

There  is  in  this  article,  very  much  that  is  of  sterling 
value — of  rare  excellence  in  matter  and  manner  ;  and 
we  heartily  wish  that  every  intelligent  man  in  the 
whole  country  might  read  the  whole  of  it.  For  no 
man  can  read  it  without  benefit,  and  if  it  has  the  defect 


106  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

which  we  ascribe  to  it,  that  defect  will  appear  more 
palpably  than  by  any  analysis  or  abridgment  of  its 
contents  ;  as  it  will  appear  in  immediate  contrast  with 
the  light  of  Scriptural  truth  and  goodness — a  fixed 
idea,  struggling  to  reconcile  itself  with  the  infallible 
authority  of  Scripture,  and  the  inward  consciousness 
of  spiritual  discernment  and  assurance  of  the  truth. 
It  is  just  because  of  its  excellence  that  we  venture  to 
hold  up  our  farthing  candle,  not  in  a  spirit  of  contro- 
versy, but  solely  because  the  article  affords  materials 
and  scope  for  that  sort  of  elucidation,  which  the  pre- 
sent state  of  the  subject  most  evidently  calls  for.  To 
those  who  turn  their  attention  to  that  subject,  nothing- 
can  be  more  manifest  than  that  the  term  inspiration  is, 
by  writers  generally,  and  the  best  of  them,  employed, 
not  uniformly  in  one  clear,  well-defined  sense,  but  vari- 
ously in  different  senses.  To  exhibit  and  illustrate 
that  fact  is  a  main  purpose  of  the  present  volume. 
The  reader,  very  likely,  may  tire  of  the  reiterations 
which  are  demanded  by  the  various  aspects  of  the  sub- 
ject that  present  themselves,  but  he  will,  it  is  hoped, 
be  satisfied,  that  every  erroneous  and  every  inadequate 
theory,  starts  with  an  unscriptural,  an  erroneous,  or  at 
least  an  inadequate  statement  of  what  is  meant  by  In- 
spiration. 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  107 


CHAPTER  VI. 

INSTINCT,     INTUITION,    AND      INTELLECTUAL      ACTION 

CONSIDERED. 

L  THE  manifestations  of  our  intuitional  perceptions,  compared  to  the 
manifestations  of  instinct  by  inferior  races  of  creatures,  and  distin- 
guished from  intellectual  operations — Reference  to  Mill's  System  of 
Logic — His  doctrine  of  intuition. 

IT  is  the  purpose  of  the  following  observations,  in  op- 
position to  the  intuitional  rationalists,  to  make  manifest 
the  fallacy  of  supposing  that  Divine  truths  can,  con- 
sistently with  our  constitution  and  modes  of  intellect- 
ual action,  be  discovered  by  intuition,  or  be  conveyed 
to  the  human  mind,  otherwise  than  in  words  ;  that  the 
power  of  intuition  is  not  a  receptive,  but  merely  a  per- 
ceptive power ;  that  it  is  exercised  immediately  and  in- 
voluntarily, and  is  not  susceptible  of  enlargement  or 
improvement  by  instruction,  and  therefore  can  not  be 
the  subject  or  organ  of  inspired  thoughts,  whether 
with  or  without  words,  or  of  any  inward  spiritual  in- 
spiration, inspiration  of  genius,  or  awakening  of 
religious  consciousness  ;  that  the  mental  power  of  per- 
ceiving truths  intuitively  is,  on  the  one  hand,  distin- 
guished from  instinct,  by  its  attribute  of  intelligence, 


108  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

and  on  the  other,  from  intellectual  cogitation,  by  the 
fact  that  intuitive  perceptions  are  immediate,  natural, 
involuntary,  and  necessary,  and  are  neither  acquired 
nor  improved  by  instruction,  whereas,  intellectual  cogi- 
tation is  mediate,  through  the  intervention  of  words,  is 
consequent  on  instruction,  and  is  voluntary. 

The  mind,  in  rational  creatures,  while  dormant,  or 
not  conscious  of  action,  is  unconscious  of  its  intuitive 
apprehensions,  convictions,  and  beliefs.  In  thinking,  it 
acts,  not  intuitively,  but  voluntarily,  and  only  accord- 
ing to  instruction  previously  acquired  through  the 
senses  or  otherwise.  Its  action  in  thinking  depends  on 
its  knowledge  of  words,  acquired  by  education  and 
employed  as  its  instrument  and  vehicle  of  thought. 
Its  knowledge  and  memory  of  words  are  the  ground 
or  condition,  of  its  foresight  of  the  results  of  mechan- 
ical motions  and  physical  acts.  It  is  conscious  of 
thinking — whether  of  results  to  be  effected,  or  of  any 
thing,  intellectual  or  physical,,  pastor  future — only  in 
words  which  are  the  correlate  and  vehicle  of  its 
thoughts.  But  in  thinking  and  being  conscious  of  its 
thoughts  in  words,  it  thinks  and  becomes  conscious  of 
the  words  which  signify  those  of  its  intuitive  percep- 
tions which  coincide  with  the  particular  subject  of  its 
thoughts.  Those  intuitions,  spontaneously  and  with  a 
rapidity  and  by  a  process  of  mental  action,  of  which 
we  are  not  conscious,  present  themselves  as  if  pread- 
justed  to  the  words  in  which  we  think.  We  are  con- 
scious of  them  only  in  the  act  of  thinking  as  we  are 
conscious  of  perceiving  external  objects  only  by  reason 
of  the  preadjustment  of  the  visual  organ  to  the  objects 
seen  and  to  the  act  of  the  mind  in  seeing. 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  109 

On  the  other  hand,  though  instinct  in  the  inferior 
races  is  a  part  of  their  nature,  as  intuition  is  a  part  of 
man's  nature,  the  inferior  races  do  not  think.  They 
have  no  vehicle  of  thought.  They  have  nothing  cor- 
responding to  our  words,  by  which  to  become  conscious 
of  thought ;  nothing  to  be  the  instrument  of  memory, 
reflection,  or  of  forethought  of  mechanical  results.  If 
they  have  a  sensational  language,  by  which  they  are 
conscious  of  and  remember  sensations,  it  is  not  a  lan- 
guage of  intellect  —  it  is  not  articulate,  it  can  not  be 
spoken  or  written,  it  is  in  no  respect  analogous  to  wordSj 
it  is  not  interposed  between  sensation  and  thought,  it  is 
not  a  subject  of  consciousness  or  memory,  as  any  thing 
distinct  from  sensation.  They  act  independently  of  in- 
struction and  prior  to  experience.  Unlike  man — who 
is  conscious  of  his  thoughts  by  being  conscious  of  the 
words  in  which  he  thinks — they  have  no  analogous 
consciousness  of  thought,  intention,  or  foresight  in  any 
of  their  organic  movements  ormechanical  constructions. 
The  bee  constructs  her  cell,  and  the  bird  her  nest  as 
perfectly  at  first,  and  without  instruction  or  experience, 
as  after  the  first  or  of  any  number  of  trials.  They 
work  with  exact  precision  towards  a  perfect  struc- 
ture of  the  proper  form  and  with  the  needful 
adaptations  and  furniture,  without  any  previous  know- 
ledge of  the  process,  or  foresight  of  the  issue  of  their 
toil.  Such  instinct  is  in  their  nature  as  a  basis,  condi- 
tion, or  rule  of  physical  and  mechanical  action,  without 
intelligent  design,  foresight,  or  reflection,  what  intui- 
tions in  man's  nature  are,  as  a  basis,  condition,  or  regu- 
lator of  intellectual  action,  the  acquisition  of  knowledge 
by  instruction,  the  use  of  language  as  the  medium 


110  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

and  instrument  of  thought,  the  exercise  of  the  power 
of  thinking,  of  comparison,  foresight,  and  reflection. 
These  phenomena  of  rational  minds,  presuppose  and 
require  an  intermediate  instrumentality  which  is  .want- 
ing to  the  irrational,  non-cogitative,  and  non-responsi- 
ble races,  namely,  words,  as  the  medium  and  instru- 
ment of  thought  wherever  the  intellectual  power  of 
thought  exists.  By  the  possession  of  this  power,  this 
instrument,  and  the  natural  capacity  of  intuition,  the 
child,  rising  by  degrees,  as  the  exigencies  of  his  com- 
plex nature  and  the  progress  of  his  responsibilities  de- 
mand, to  the  intelligence  of  man,  is  as  well  qualified 
to  exhibit  the  phenomena  of  a  thinking  being,  as  the 
new-fledged  bee  is  by  its  natural  capacity,  qualified  to 
exhibit  the  phenomena  of  instinct.  Our  thoughts, 
whether  of  sensational  or  of  intuitional  perceptions, 
are  conceived  in  words.  Back  of  this,  we  know 
nothing.  Back  of  this,  we  are  as  totally  ignorant  of 
the  intellectual  as  of  the  intuitional  acts  of  the  soul ; 
and  as  totally  ignorant  of  intuition  as  a  constituent  of 
the  nature  of  the  soul,  as  we  are  of  instinct  as  of  the 
nature  of  the  irrational  tribes.  The  one  characterizes 
the  irrational,  whose  acts  have  no  moral  character. 
The  other,  coupled  with  the  use  of  words  and  with 
volition,  in  the  act  of  thinking,  and  with  consciousness 
of  the  thoughts  conceived,  characterizes  the  rational, 
as  moral  and  responsible  agents.  The  nexus  between 
the  soul  and  its  responsible  acts  in  willing  and  think, 
ing,  is  language,  words,  in  which  it  conceives  the 
thoughts  which  it  wills  to  think.  Because  thinking  is 
a  voluntary  act  of  the  rational  mind — because  it  wills 
to  think,  and  necessarilv  thinks  and  is  conscious  of  its 

•  t/ 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  Ill 

thoughts,  in  words,  it  is  responsible  for  its  thoughts ; 
the  act  of  voluntary  thinking,  is  a  moral  act,  for  which 
the  agent  is  responsible. 

A  knowledge  of  the  signification  and  usage  of  words 
is  as  necessarily  prerequisite  to  intuitive  moral  percep- 
tions, as  it  is  to  the  testimony  of  conscience,  to  the 
intellectual  conception  of  thoughts,  to  volition,  and  to 
faith.  The  mental  power  of  intuition  is  excited  by  the 
action  of  the  intellect.  When  we  intellectually  con- 
ceive and  are  conscious  of  truths  which  have  a  mathe- 
matical, a  logical,  or  a  moral  relation  to  each  other,  we 
intuitively  perceive  that  relation,  and  the  fact,  proposi- 
tion, inference,  or  truth,  which  it  necessarily  involves, 
and  on  the  basis  of  which,  after  perceiving  it,  we  rea- 
son. When  we  conceive  in  words  the  numbers  one  and 
two,  we  intuitively  perceive  the  relations  of  those  num- 
bers and  the  facts  that  two  is  twice  one,  and  that  one  is  the 
half  of  two.  When  we  conceive  a  proposition,  we  con- 
ceive certain  thoughts  in  words  which  are  related  to,  and 
involve,  and  imply,  other  thoughts,  and  which  in  that 
relation  excite  the  intuitive  perception  of  those  other 
thoughts.  Every  logical  proposition  expresses  certain 
real  or  assumed  truths  as  premises,  which  involve  and 
imply  other  truths,  the  reality  of  which  is  the  evidence 
of  certainty  in  the  premises.  If  what  we  intellectually 
conceive  in  words  as  premises,  is  truth,  the  mind  will 
intuitively,  immediately,  involuntarily,  and  necessarily, 
perceive  the  correlate,  involved  and  implied  truths. 

To  this  process,  however,  a  previous  knowledge  is 
necessary,  both  of  the  words  in  which  we  intellectually 
conceive  the  premises  of  a  proposition,  and  a  know- 
ledge of  the  words  which  express  the  truths  which  we 


112  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

intuitively  perceive  when  those  truths,  bj  being  so 
perceived,  become  objects  of  intellectual  conception. 

The  mind  can  have  no  innate  knowledge  of  words 
or  of  thoughts,  concerning  any  one  more  than  of  any 
other  class  of  truths,  without  previous  instruction.  To 
suppose  the  contrary  would  imply  omniscience  or 
plenary  knowledge.  And  if  a  knowledge  of  words 
must  be  gained  by  instruction  prior  to  our  conception 
and  consciousness  of  thoughts  in  words,  a  knowledge 
of  words  to  signify  the  truths  which  we  intuitively 
perceive,  must  be  acquired  by  previous  or  by  coinci- 
dent instruction.  This  seems  to  be  an  unavoidable 
conclusion  from  the  fact,  that  intuitions  are  not  instincts, 
but  are  intelligent  acts  of  the  mind,  and  acts  immedi- 
ately related  to  what  the  mind,  at  the  same  time,  intel- 
ligently and  consciously  thinks.  All  intelligent  acts 
imply  mental  intelligence.  To  perceive  truths  intui- 
tively when  the  mind  had  not  been  so  instructed  con- 
cerning related  truths,  as,  under  the  requisite  conditions, 
to  render  the  perception  obvious  and  necessary,  would 
imply  omniscience. 

Thus  when  we  intellectually  conceive  the  proposition 
that  "order  universally  proves  the  existence  of  mind," 
and  the  fact  that  "order  exists  and  is  manifest  in  the 
works  of  nature,"  we  conceive  certain  definite  truths 
in  words  which  we  have  learned  by  instruction.  These 
truths  are  not  intuitively  perceived ;  and  no  man  thinks 
them  who  has  not  been  instructed,  or  uses  the  words 
to  express  them  without  having  learnt  the  meaning  of 
the  words.  But  to  one  so  instructed  as  clearly  to  con- 
ceive those  truths,  the  correlate  truth,  the  legitimate 
logical  inference,  '  that  the  works  of  nature  prove  the 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  113 

existence  of  mind,'  becomes  obvious  and  is  intuitively 
and  immediately  perceived.  No  man,  however  intui- 
tively, perceives  such  a  truth,  who  does  not  at  once 
conceive  it  intellectually  in  words,  and  the  knowledge 
necessary  to  the  intuitive  perception  is  supplied  or  ren- 
dered obvious,  by  the  knowledge  necessary  to  the 
prior  intellectual  conception  of  the  cognate  truths. 
Intuition,  considered  simply  as  an  intelligent  act  of  the 
mind,  is  immediate  and  involuntary,  considered  rela- 
tively to  our  voluntary  intellectual  cogitations,  it  is  a 
logical  process.  In  the  proposition,  "I  think,"  a  fact  is 
expressed  of  which  we  are  intellectually  conscious. 
The  logical  induction,  "therefore  I  exist,"  is  intuitively 
perceived.  The  proposition  is  a  premise,  from  which 
the  inference  necessarily  follows,  and  is  therefore  im- 
mediately, involuntarily,  and  unavoidably  perceived. 
The  conscious  verbal  knowledge  pre-requisite  to  our 
conception  of  the  premise,  suffices  with  whatever 
knowledge  we  previously  have  relating  to  our  exist- 
ence, to  quicken  and  evolve  the  intuitive  perception 
of  the  inference. 

The  exercise  of  the  power  of  intuition,  and  the  im- 
mediate effect  of  its  exercise,  are  perfectly  simple.  But 
no  sooner  is  a  truth  perceived  by  intuition,  than  it 
becomes  an  object  or  occasion  of  complex  attention  and 
influence — of  voluntary  thought,  of  sensibility,  of  con- 
sciousness, of  memory,  of  association  with  other  truths. 
And  hence  the  confusion  which  arises  from  the  use, 
interchangeably,  of  terms  which  denote  the  simple 
exercise  and  immediate  effect  of  that  power,  and 
terms  which  relate  to  subsequent,  mediate,  and  com- 
plex effects  connected  with  the  intellect,  the  will,  and 


114:  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

other  faculties,  states  of  mind,  and  associated  truths. 
A  like  confusion  has  occurred  in  respect  to  other  phe- 
nomena of  the  mind.  Thus  the  will,  or  power  of  voli- 
tion, the  exercise  of  which,  (determined,  as  it  uniformly 
is,  by  the  immediately  preceding  state  of  the  mind,) 
and  the  immediate  effect  of  its  exercise,  are  perfectly 
simple,  is  represented  by  the  same  term — will — some- 
times, by  the  same  and  by  different  authors,  to  denote 
the  power  itself,  as  an  efficient,  executive  power,  the 
simple  exercise  of  it,  and  its  immediate  effect  in  de- 
ciding on  present  and  future  acts ;  and  again,  in  a 
wide  and  complex  sense,  to  denote  or  include  all  the 
moral  preferences,  inclinations,  disinclinations,  desires, 
and  affections  of  the  soul.  In  this  general  sense  it  is 
contra-distinguished  from  the  understanding,  as  com- 
prehending all  the  faculties,  states,  and  exercises  of  the 
soul  which  are  not  included  in  that  faculty.  Such  a 
use  of  terms,  without  due  discrimination,  can  not  but 
confuse  and  mislead.  For  these  mental  phenomena, 
these  inward  states,  affections,  feelings,  desires,  inclina- 
tions, are  in  relation  to  executive  acts  of  the  will,  but 
motives,  which  excite,  influence,  move,  determine,  the 
will  to  decide  on  our  acting  one  way  or  another  in 
every  instance  of  responsible  action,  internal  or  ex- 
ternal. The  efficiency,  however,  is  not  in  the  motives. 
They  are  simply  the  reasons  why  the  agent  determines 
to  act,  wills  to  exert  his  efficiency,  in  one  way — to  one 
effect — rather  than  another.  In  this  sense  and  to  this 
extent  they  are  causes.  They  are  reasons,  consider- 
ations, inducements.  Whereas  a  moral  agent,  is,  in 
the  nature  of  things,  the  efficient  cause  of  his  own  acts. 
The  will  is  the  efficient  power,  by  the  exercise  of  which, 


OF  THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  115 

the  agent  determines,  wills,  decides,  on  his  acts.  He 
decides  in  view  of  considerations,  desires,  aversions, 
likes,  dislikes,  whether  good  or  bad,  which  are  present 
to  his  mind,  and  excite  him  to  exert  his  power  of  voli- 
tion and  to  act.  He  can  not  decide  without  such 
reasons  immediately  in  view,  nor  against  the  prepon- 
derance of  some  of  them  over  the  others.  The  freedom 
of  his  will  consists  in  his  freely  deciding  according  to 
the  reasons,  good  or  bad,  which  preponderate.  Com- 
paring his  decision  with  those  reasons,  he  is  conscious 
that  in  his  decision  he  acts  freely.  Those  reasons — the 
desires,  aversions,  feelings,  affections — except  so  far  as 
they  are  animal  or  physical  desires,  etc.,  are  neverthe- 
less morally  good  or  bad,  and  as  such,  give  the  like 
character  to  the  acts  decided  on  by  the  will,  whether 
they  be  external  or  internal  acts.  They  are  morally 
good  or  bad,  virtuous,  or  vicious,  as  they  proceed  from 
a  depraved  nature,  a  corrupt  heart,  or  the  contrary. 
They  are  morally  good  or  bad  as  they  exist  prior  to 
the  acts  which  they  influence  the  will  to  decide  on,  as 
the  acts  are  on  which  the  will  decides.  They  are  free, 
unconstrained,  and  if  they  are  not,  or  in  so  far  as  they 
are  not  effects  of  prior  volitions,  they  are  not  all  neces- 
sarily contrary  to,  or  agreeable  to,  the  will.  If  in  their 
very  nature,  and  as  motives,  they  are  all  bad,  the  will 
merely  decides  on  acting  them  out,  or  on  further  cher- 
ishing and  manifesting  them  in  internal  or  external 
acts.  If  as  motives,  good  and  bad  affections  are  in 
conflict,  the  will  decides  according  to  those  which 
preponderate.  Primarily,  morality  is  predicable  of 
the  motives — that  is,  of  the  desires,  feelings,  affections 
— in  the  view  and  under  the  influence  of  which  the 


116  THE    PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

will  decides ;  so  that  to  determine  the  moral  quality 
of  an  act,  we  must  ascertain  the  motive  on  account  of 
which  the  will  decided  on  it.  The  simple  act  of  the 
will  in  deciding  is  the  same  in  all  cases ;  and  though  it 
involves  the  responsibility  of  the  agent,  does  not  itself, 
independently  of  the  motives,  determine  whether  the  act 
decided  on  is  good  or  bad.  As  holiness  is  that  in  the 
moral  nature  of  the  agent — that  moral  quality  which,  as 
manifested  in  the  affections,  volitions,  thoughts,  and  acts, 
is  conformable  to  the  Divine  Law  as  a  rule  of  duty  ;  so 
morality  is  that  in  the  moral  nature  of  the  affections,  de- 
sires, etc.,  which,  as  motives,  influence  the  will,  which 
makes  the  volitions  and  the  acts  which  they  induce,  mo- 
rally good  or  bad.  As  the  motives — the  desires,  affec- 
tions, etc. — do  not  originate  in  volition,  their  moral  qual- 
ity necessarily  results  from  their  source  in  the  moral 
nature  of  the  agent. 

Accordingly  our  intuitive  perception  of  the  moral 
quality  of  a  volition  or  voluntary  action,  pre-supposes 
intellectual,  that  is.  acquired  knowledge  of  a  standard 
of  comparison,  and  of  the  meaning  and  usage  of  the 
words,  action,  moral,  good,  bad,  and  such  others  as 
are  necessary  to  the  intellectual  conception,  conscious- 
ness, and  expression  of  what  we  intuitively  perceive. 

Knowledge,  strictly  defined,  is  intellectual  apprehen- 
sion, cognition,  of  revealed  or  other  truths — of  external 
or  internal  phenomena.  It  implies,  and  is  dependent 
on,  instruction.  It  is  that  which  we  conceive,  are  con- 
scious of,  remember,  and  express,  in  words;  and  is 
limited  to  that  which  we  have  words  to  express.  In- 
tuitive perceptions  are  not  primarily  in  this  category. 
To  suppose  them  to  be,  would  be  to  suppose  that  we 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  117 

have  intuitive,  immediate,  involuntary,  spontaneous, 
in  distinction  from  acquired  knowledge  of  words : 
which,  assuredly,  no  one  will  pretend.  Eevealed 
truths,  therefore,  can  not  be  conveyed  to  the  mind  in 
any  way  so  as  to  be  intuitively  perceived.  They  must 
be  conveyed  in  words,  so  as  to  be  intellectually  con- 
ceived, realized  to  the  consciousness,  remembered,  and 
expressed.  If  inspired  truths,  revelations,  or  any  other 
truths,  from  without,  must  be  primarily  perceived  by 
intuition,  then  they  must  be  perceived  without  words 
directly  or  indirectly  signifying,  implying,  or  render- 
ing, the  perception  of  them  obvious  and  necessary;  and 
can  not  be  conveyed  or  confirmed  by  testimony,  nor 
bring  with  them  any  external  evidence  or  authority. 
On  such  a  supposition,  an  external  revelation  is  impos- 
sible. Skepticism,  mysticism,  and  utilitarianism,  may 
remain,  but,  to  us,  truth  and  right,  morality  and  moral 
obligation,  can.  have  no  foundation  or  existence  out  of 
our  own  minds. 

If  there  is  in  reality,  in  our  feelings,  desires,  and 
affections,  and  in  our  external  acts,  what  we  under- 
stand and  are  conscious  of  as  truth  and  falsehood,  right 
and  wrong,  morality  and  immorality,  then  we  are 
bound,  under  moral  obligation,  to  feel  and  act  in  con- 
formity to  truth  and  right,  and  not  to  feel  or  act  the 
contrary ;  which  implies  a  standard,  a  criterion  of  truth 
and  right  out  of  ourselves,  as  clearly  as  a  civil  or  a 
criminal  act,  under  a  civil  government,  implies  a  law  of 
that  government,  as  its  criterion.  Man  is  bound  by 
that  law  because  he  is  a  subject  to  that  civil  govern- 
ment, and  responsible  to  it  for  his  acts  so  far  as  they 
are  enjoined  or  forbidden  by  its  laws.  So  man  is  un- 


118  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

der  moral  obligation,  because  lie  is  a  rational  creature, 
under  a  moral  government — a  government  of  moral 
laws  concerning  moral  feelings,  desires,  affections,  and 
actions,  the  enactment  and  enforcement  of  which  is 
morally  right,  because  it  is  according  to  the  nature, 
will,  rights,  moral  perfections,  righteousness,  holiness, 
justice,  goodness,  and  truth,  of  the  Divine  Lawgiver ; 
and  conformity  to  which,  therefore,  is  right,  and  the 
opposite  is  wrong.  Those  laws  take  cognizance  of  the 
feelings,  thoughts,  and  actions,  of  the  rational  creature, 
and  are  the  ultimate  standard  and  criterion  of  them. 
They  are  therefore  good  or  bad  as  they  conform  to  the 
laws  or  the  contrary. 

Accordingly  there  is  nothing  more  absolutely  ulti- 
mate, more  unresolvable  into  any  thing  less  complex, 
or  more  exempt  from  indefiniteness  and  uncertainty, 
or  which  we  more  clearly  conceive,  and  are  conscious 
of,  than  what  we  denominate  moral  right.  Every 
effort  to  explain  it  by  something  else,  pre-supposes 
and  assumes  just  what  we  conceive  in  those  terms  as 
the  criterion,  and  as  immutable  in  its  nature,  and  inde- 
pendent of  human  speculations.  Nor  is  any  thing 
more  obvious  than  the  necessity  to  a  moral  system  of 
such  an  ultimate  principle,  and  immutable  criterion. 
For  a  moral  system  implies  a  moral  lawgiver,  a  moral 
law,  moral  obligation,  moral  sanctions,  and  moral  re- 
sults ;  and,  therefore,  an  immutable  standard  of  moral 
rectitude.  But  to  suppose  an  intuitive  revelation  of 
truth  and  right  as  founded  in  the  Divine  nature  and 
perfections,  and  exhibited  in  the  inspired  writings,  so 
as  to  harmonize  with  our  natures  and  our  conscious- 
ness, without  an  acquired  knowledge  of  words,  and  of 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTUEES.  119 

involved  and  implied  truths,  would  be  to  arrogate  om- 
niscience. 

Whatever  of  mystery  there  may  be  in  respect  either 
to  instinct  or  intuition,  for  aught  that  appears,  there  is 
no  more  of  mystery  in  the  facts,  that  the  rational  agent 
is  originally  endowed  with  the  power  of  intuition,  that 
the  power  is  excited  by  intellectual  cogitation,  and 
that  the  truths  perceived  are  realized  to  the  conscious- 
ness in  words,  than  there  is  of  mystery  in  the  facts — 
constantly  exposed  to  our  observation  concerning  in- 
stinct in  the  inferior  races — that  it  is  excited  by  natural 
exigencies,  that  without  any  consciousness  of  its  import 
or  of  its  tendency,  it  invariably  and  infallibly  guides 
the  irrational  agent  to  a  specific  and  perfect  result,  and 
controls  and  restricts  its  agency  to  acts,  which,  in  the 
directest  possible  manner,  tend  to  the  production  of 
that  result.  No  one  entertains  a  question  but  that  such 
instinct,  in  whatever  degree  it  may  exist,  and  in  what- 
ever ways  it  may  be  manifested,  is  inherent  in  the 
nature  of  the  inferior  races.  It  is  the  sole  guide  of  the 
acts  by  which  their  exigencies  are  provided  for,  and 
by  which  the  succession  of  their  species  is  maintained. 
It  is  not  improved  by  time,  instruction,  or  experience, 
but  is  as  perfect  at  the  dawn  of  their  existence,  as  at 
any  stage  of  their  progress.  So  of  the  intuitional 
power  of  the  rational  mind.  It  is  as  evidently  of  the 
nature  of  the  soul,  as  instinct  is  of  the  nature  of  the 
irrational  tribes.  Intuitive  perceptions  arise,  become 
objects  of  thought,  and  are  realized  to  the  conscious- 
ness coincidently  with  the  earliest  consciousness  of 
thought.  In  relation  to  the  intellectual  exercise  and 
consciousness  of  thought,  this  efficient  power  preexists, 


120  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

as  truly  as  the  understanding,  or  the  will,  or  any  con- 
stituent of  the  rational  mind  exists,  prior  to  any  mani- 
festation of  intellectual  phenomena.  The  exercise  of 
this  power  is  not  improved  by  literary  instruction,  or 
by  intellectual  experience,  though  it  occurs  only  in 
conjunction  with  intellectual  cogitation. 

A  type  of  these  constituents  of  animal  and  rational 
natures,  is  exhibited  in  mineral  and  vegetable  organ- 
isms throughout  the  realms  of  nature ;  in  the  specific 
and  invariable  forms  which  result  from  electric  and 
magnetic  influence,  and  from  chemical  affinities  in 
the  phenomena  of  crystallizations,  and  of  vegetable 
growths.  It  is  that  in  the  nature  of  vegetable  seeds 
and  germs,  which,  as  quickened  under  the  requisite 
conditions,  determines  the  forms,  the  colors,  and  all 
the  characteristics  and  products  of  the  full-grown  plant 
or  tree.  For  according  to  the  record  of  the  creation : 
"The  earth  brought  forth  grass  and  herb,  yielding  seed 
after  his  kind,  and  the  tree  yielding  fruit,  whose  seed 
was  in  itself,  after  his  kind."  So  that  the  nature  of 
every  seed  after  its  kind,  when  excited  by  the  stimu- 
lants of  germination,  and  manifested  in  the  growth,  the 
foliage,  and  all  the  characteristics  of  its  kind,  exhibits 
the  same  forces,  tendencies,  and  results  as  every  other 
seed  of  the  same  kind ;  as  the  nature  of  every  bee, 
when  quickened  into  life,  and  excited  by  its  exigencies, 
manifests  itself  with  unerring  precision  in  the  con- 
struction of  cells  of  identically  the  same  forms  and 
proportions,  as  those  fabricated  by  its  predecessors,  its 
contemporaries,  and  its  followers;  and  as  the  nature 
of  the  intuitional  power,  when  excited  by  intellectual 
cogitation,  manifests  itself  uniformly  by  the  same  iden- 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  121 

tical  intuitions,  which,  being  as  objects  of  thoughts 
intellectually  conceived,  are  realized  to  the  conscious- 
ness, as  all  our  intellectual  conceptions  are,  in  words, 
the  appointed,  intermediate,  and  exclusive,  vehicle  and 
instrument  of  thought. 

That  attribute  of  material  nature  the  effect  of  which, 
under  the  proper  conditions,  is  the  formation  of  crys- 
tals of  the  same  identical  figures  and  proportions,  may 
be  regarded  as  a  primary  exemplification  of  that  order 
in  the  works  of  nature  which  necessitates  the  ascription 
of  those  works  to  the  will  and  purpose  of  the  Divine 
Mind,  and  in  that  respect  as  a  type  of  that  attribute  of 
the  nature  of  sentient  irrational  creatures,  called  instinct; 
the  effect  of  which  is  the  mechanical  construction  by 
insects  of  one  kind,  of  cells  of  the  same  identical  forms 
and  mathematical  proportions,  and  by  insects,  birds, 
and  quadrupeds,  of  the  several  species,  each  in  its  own 
invariable  manner,  in  the  construction  of  its  habitation, 
the  selection  and  acquisition  of  its  food,  the  care  of  its 
young,  and  in  a  thousand  other  particulars;  and  yet 
further,  as  a  type  of  that  attribute  of  man's  rational 
nature,  the  effect  of  which  is  the  spontaneous  evolve- 
ment,  under  the  proper  excitement,  of  intuitions,  mental 
perceptions,  convictions,  beliefs,  that  capacity  of  rational 
agents,  which,  though  subject  to  appropriate  excite- 
ment, is  independent  of  instruction. 

The  attribute  affirmed  of  as  an  endowment  of  mate- 
rial nature,  is  that  of  adaptation,  under  prescribed  and 
well-known  or  ascertainable  conditions,  to  certain 
specific,  limited,  and  uniform  changes.  The  attribute 
affirmed  of,  as  of  the  nature  of  irrational  creatures,  is 
that  of  sentient  impulse  to  certain  specific  and  uniform 

6 


122  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

results,  without  knowledge,  foresight,  or  consciousness 
of  design.  The  attribute  affirmed  of,  as  of  the  nature 
of  rational  minds,  is  that  of  efficient  agency  in  the  per- 
ception of  certain  truths  concerning  ourselves  as  agents, 
and  concerning  the  relations,  agreements,  or  disagree- 
ments, of  moral,  intellectual,  and  mathematical  pro- 
positions, geometrical  figures,  numbers,  proportions, 
and  the  like — absolute  and  self-evident  or  necessary 
truths,  on  the  basis  of  which,  as  the  regulator  or  test, 
our  acquisition  of  intellectual  knowledge  depends,  and 
the  existence  and  cognizance  of  which  is  essential  to 
such  action  of  the  will,  whatever  may  be  the  degree 
of  acquired  knowledge,  as  to  determine  that  the  agent 
is  morally  responsible. 

Accordingly  it  happens  in  the  first  of  these  cases 
that  adaptation  to  specific  changes,  is  ineffectual,  except 
under  the  prescribed  conditions ;  in  the  second,  instinct- 
ive, sentient  impulse,  is  dormant,  when  the  stimulus 
of  exigency  ceases  ;  and  in  the  third,  where  the  coin- 
cidence of  efficient  intuitional  agency  with  voluntary 
intellectual  cogitation,  has  not  occurred — as  in  infancy 
— or  has  been  destroyed  by  physical  or  mental  disease 
— as  in  idiots  and  maniacs,  moral  responsibility  is  not 
imputed. 

It  may  be  imagined  that  intuitive  perceptions  imply 
a  knowledge  of  truths  which  there  had  been  neither 
means  nor  opportunity  of  acquiring  by  instruction,  and, 
therefore,  that  such  knowledge  must  be  asserted  to  be 
innate,  or  of  the  nature  of  the  soul.  But  the  inference 
is  not  warranted ;  for  it  is  not  simply  knowledge  ac- 
quired by  intellectual  instruction,  that  is  implied  ;  but 
the  perception,  to  which  the  soul  is  constitutionally 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  123 

qualified,   of  truths,  which,   under  the  circumstances 
and  in  the  connections  in  which  they  are  perceived^ 
are  perfectly  obvious,  and  can  not  but  be  perceived 
when  the  mind  is  excited  by  the  intellectual  conception 
of  cognate  truths ;  just  as  the  mind  can  not  but  perceive 
the  forms  and  colors  of  visible  objects  through  the  eye 
when  opened  in  the  presence  of  those  objects,  and  ex- 
cited by  the  presence  and  agency  of  light.     And  if 
there  is  in  the  nature  of  every  vegetable  seed  a  consti- 
tuent, a  capacity,  a  quality,  which,  in  the  process  of 
germination  and  development,  manifests  itself  in  the 
stem,  the  branches,  the  foliage,  the  seeds,  of  the  herb 
or  tree,  after  its  kind ;  and  if  there  is  in  the  nature  of 
the  inferior  races  a  capacity,  an  aptitude,  a  sensitive 
impulse,   which,   under  the  stimulus  which   life   and 
exigency  supply,  manifests  itself  in  all  the  results  of 
instinct ;  we  may,  without  incredulity  or  wonder,  con- 
clude that  there  is  in  the  nature  of  the  rational  soul  a 
power,  capacity,  efficiency,  which,  without  prior  instruc- 
tion, manifests  itself  in  the  perception  of  self-evident 
truths  when  excited  by  intellectual  cogitation  ;  truths, 
which,  under  the  alleged  conditions,  are  obvious  to  the 
mental  eye,  and  are  of  necessity  perceived,   and  are 
realized  to  the  consciousness  in  intellectual  verbal  con- 
ceptions. 

What  takes  place  in  the  laboratory  of  the  soul  in  the 
intervals  of  intellectual  excitement,  when  its  intuitive 
perceptions  are  not  conceived  in  words,  and,  therefore, 
are  not  realized  to  the  consciousness,  we  know  not; 
and  while  we  are  morally  responsible  for  the  affections, 
thoughts,  and  acts,  of  which  we  are  conscious,  it  may 
not  specially  concern  us  to  know  what  intuitions,  if 


124:  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

any,  occur  in  those  intervals.  For  aught  that  we  have 
any  means  of  knowing,  the  mental  power  of  intuitive 
perception  may  be  as  dormant  as  the  susceptibility  of 
change  in  matter,  in  the  absence  of  the  requisite  condi- 
tions ;  as  the  capacity  of  development  in  seeds  prior  to 
germination;  as  the  instinctive  power  of  impulse,  when 
excitement  ceases ;  or  as  the  visual  faculty  in  the 
absence  of  light,  and  the  auditory,  in  the  absence  of 
sound. 

We  know  the  mind  by  the  mental  phenomena  of 
which  we  are  conscious.  It  discerns  external  things 
by  the  instrumentality  of  our  physical  organs  of  sensa- 
tion. Through  the  eye  it  sees  external  objects. 
Through  the  ear  it  hears  external  sounds.  Through 
one  class  of  sentient  nerves  it  feels,  through  another  it 
distinguishes  what  we  taste,  and  through  yet  another 
it  discriminates  agreeable  from  repulsive  odors.  These 
physical  organs  are  its  instruments  of  intercourse  and 
communion  with  external  nature  in  its  several  modes 
of  contact  and  manifestation,  while  it  is  itself  diverse 
from  matter  and  distinct  from  the  investiture  of  flesh 
and  blood  by  which  its  spiritual  and  imperishable  na- 
ture, its  essence  and  its  acts,  are  alike  concealed.  But 
it  has  its  own  peculiar  powers  and  modes  of  action  and 
of  manifestation  to  its  own  consciousness  and  to  that  of 
kindred  minds ;  the  efficient  power  of  volition ;  the 
intuitional  power  of  perceiving  propositions,  relations, 
obvious,  necessary,  undemonstrable  truths,  inductions, 
corollaries,  the  agreement  or  disagreement  of  different 
propositions ;  the  intellectual  power  of  thinking — of 
conceiving — being  conscious  of  remembering  and  ex- 
pressing thoughts  in  words ;  the  power  of  conveying 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  125 

and  of  receiving  thoughts  by  vocal  articulations  and  by 
written  characters  ;  the  power  of  internal  communion 
with  itself,  and  of  external  communion  with  all  the 
phenomena  of  the  physical,  intellectual,  and  spiritual 
universe. 

There  is  neither  any  apparent  nor  any  conceivable 
reason,  why  the  rational  agent  should  not  by  its  nature 
and  constitution  be  capable  of  intuitional  perceptions, 
as  well  as  of  intellectual  conceptions ;  nor  why  intui- 
tive perceptions  should  not  be  excited  and  occasioned 
by  the  action  of  the  mind  in  its  intellectual  cogitations, 
and,  like  them,  be  realized  to  the  consciousness  in 
words.  All  the  manifestations  of  mind  which  we  are 
able  to  observe,  and  all  the  phenomena  of  mental  ac- 
tion, are  in  evidence  of  this  conclusion ;  since  the 
truths  intuitively  perceived  are  not  occult  and  difficult, 
but  obvious  and  necessary,  and  are,  by  the  intellectual 
action  which  induces  the  perception  of  them,  made  ob- 
jects of  intellectual  conception,  that  is,  of  thought  in 
words,  and  are  thereby  realized  to  the  consciousness, 
as  thoughts  intellectually  conceived  in  other  cases  are. 

It  will  be  observed  that  a  distinction  is  made  be- 
tween intuitional  perceptions  of  truths,  and  intellectual 
conceptions  of  thoughts.  The  former  is  not  thinking 
any  more  than  sensation  is.  It  is  not  sensation.  It  is 
seeing  mentally.  It  is  the  mind's  involuntary  apprehen- 
sion, cognizance,  conviction,  belief,  of  existing,  obvi- 
ous, necessary  truths,  whereby  they  become  objects  of 
intellectual  conception — of  thought  in  words,  so  as  to 
be  realized  to  the  intelligent  consciousness,  and  to  be 
remembered.  The  intuitional  power,  capacity,  effi- 
ciency, like  instinct,  acts  without  volition,  and  without 


126  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

instruction ;  the  intellectual,  acts  only  in  accordance 
with  instruction,  conceiving  thoughts  in  words  as  its 
medium  and  instrument,  of  which  the  meaning  has 
been  learned,  and  which  are  adequate  to  each  and 
every  thought  that  we  intellectually  conceive.  The 
intuitional  power,  is,  in  the  view  thus  taken,  independ- 
ent of  the  will ;  the  intellectual  is  its  deputy  acting  in 
obedience  to  volition  and  according  to  instruction. 

How  far  this  view  may  differ  from  that  commonly 
taken,  needs  not  now  to  be  considered,  the  present  ob- 
ject being  only  to  illustrate  the  distinction  between  in- 
tuition and  intellectual  action,  the  facts  that  we  con- 
ceive thoughts  only  by  the  intellect,  and  that  we  inva- 
riable conceive  thoughts — whether  of  intuitive  truths 
or  of  other  objects — only  in  words ;  and  the  conclusion, 
that  inspired  thoughts,  to  be  conceived  by  the  intellect, 
and  realized  to  the  consciousness,  must  be  inspired  in 
words. 

There  are,  indubitably,  among  the  manifested  phe- 
nomena of  mind,  involuntary,  unpremeditated,  sponta- 
neous intuitions  of  certain  self-evident  and  immutable 
truths.  But  those  truths  are  realized  to  our  conscious- 
ness not  as  non-verbal  intuitions,  but  only  as  we  intel- 
lectually conceive  them  in  words.  And  since  the  con- 
veyance of  truths  from  one  human  mind  to  another  so 
as  to  be  intellectually  conceived  or  understood  by  the 
intellect,  and  realized  to  the  consciousness,  is  of  neces- 
sity a  conveyance  in  spoken  or  written  words,  or 
equivalent  signs  ;  and  since  our  intuitional  perceptions 
are  realized  to  our  consciousness  only  as  we  intellectu- 
ally conceive  them  in  words,  it  is  a  just  induction  that 
the  conveyance  of  the  Divine  thoughts  to  our  minds 


OF   THE    HOLT   SCRIPTURES.  127 

can  not  be  by  exciting,  or  employing  instrumentally, 
our  power  of  intuition,  or  by  a  spiritual,  emotional, 
non-verbal  inspiration,  but  like  the  conveyance  of 
thoughts  from  one  human  mind  to  another,  must  be 
a  conveyance  and  a  realization  of  them  to  our  con- 
sciousness in  words. 

The  chief  difficulty  apparent  in  all  the  discussions  of 
the  subject  of  intuition,  appears  to  arise  from  not  con- 
sidering that  we  think  in  ivords,  and  that  thinking  in 
words  is  an  exercise  of  the  faculty  of  intellection  ;  while 
on  the  other  hand  intuition — mentally  seeing,  is  not  de- 
pendent on  the  instrumentality  of  words  as  its  medium, 
and  is  not  in  itself  an  act  of  which  we  are  immediately 
conscious,  but  of  which  we  become  conscious  by  exer- 
cising the  intellectual  faculty.  A  right  apprehension 
of  these  diverse  mental  operations,  may  perhaps  be  at- 
tained by  supposing  the  mind  from  its  nature,  and  its 
capacity  of  intelligence,  to  be  capable  of  perceiving- 
truths,  which  a  consciousness  of  other  correlate  truths 
renders  obvious  to  its  view  as  inferences,  facts,  convic- 
tions, and  which,  as  perceived  under  that  condition  of 
excitement,  are,  like  external  objects  which  the  mind 
perceives  through  the  eye,  objects  of  intellectual  con- 
ception in  words  by  which  they  are  realized  to  the 
consciousness. 

The  activity  of  the  mind,  the  rapidity  of  its  exer- 
cises, surpasses  our  comprehension.  We  are  distinctly 
conscious  only  of  a  portion,  perhaps  a  very  small  por- 
tion, of  its  acts  ;  and  of  that  portion  we  are  conscious 
only  as  we  intellectually  conceive  them  in  words  ;  and 
we  so  conceive  them,  only  when,  like  sensations,  facts, 
and  truths,  learned  by  instruction  and  experience,  they 


128  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

occur  in  such  relations  and  under  such  conditions  as  to 
be  objects  of  distinct  intellectual  apprehension  and 
cogitation. 

In  our  present  mode  of  existence,  the  action  of  the 
mind  is,  at  least  in  many  particulars,  modified  by  its 
relations  to  our  physical  nature  and  organization ;  but 
we  are  warranted  in  saying  that  we  are  held  accounta- 
ble for  all  those  mental  acts  which  are  voluntary  and 
of  which  we  are  conscious.  But  in  the  working  of  this 
constitution  intuitions  are  involuntary,  as  seeing  is, 
when  visible  objects  are  exposed  to  the  opened  eye. 
To  bring  our  intuitive  perceptions,  and  our  visual  acts, 
into  correlation  with  the  voluntary  exercise  of  the  in- 
tellect, as  objects  of  thought,  an  appropriate  instrumen- 
tality is  requisite — in  the  one  case  that  of  the  visual 
organ,  in  the  other,  that  of  intellectual  action  in  think- 
ing. Intuition,  it  is  plain,  is  neither  the  same  thing  as 
intellectual  cogitation,  nor  any  more  like  it  than  visual 
perception  is.  It  is  a  different  exercise  of  the  mind. 
It  is  involuntary,  which  intellectual  cogitation  is  not. 
It  is  spontaneous,  not  prompted  by  motives  like  volun- 
tary acts.  It  is  not  a  precursor,  but  a  consequent  of 
voluntary  thought.  It  is  like  seeing.  When  by  the 
distinct  exercise  of  particular  faculties — the  will  and 
the  intellect — the  attention  of  the  mind  is  directed  to 
facts,  truths,  propositions,  of  which  we  are  conscious, 
and  from  which  certain  inductions,  convictions,  beliefs, 
necessarily  follow,  we  involuntarily  and  unavoidably 
perceive  those  inferences,  and  as  we  proceed  to  asso- 
ciate and  reason  from  them,  we  intellectually  conceive 
and  think  them  in  words. 

Perhaps  the  foregoing  suggestions  concerning  tho 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  129 

difference  of  the  intuitional  from  the  intellectual  func- 
tions, may  furnish  ground  for  supplying  the  defect  of 
the  leading  systems  of  mental  philosophy  and  ethics  on 
the  one  hand,  and  the  defect  of  the  best  theological 
systems  on  the  other,  respecting  the  nature,  the  claims, 
and  the  operations  of  conscience.  The  point  at  which 
conscience  asserts  its  prerogative  is  that  at  which  the 
principles,  motives,  or  actions  of  men,  are  compared  to 
the  revealed  will  of  God,  or  to  some  other  standard 
which  is  recognized  and  received  as  of  authority  in  the 
case,  in  such  manner  as  clearly  to  evince  the  agreement 
or  disagreement  of  the  one  with  the  other,  and  to  pro- 
duce, in  a  higher  or  lower  degree,  as  the  perceptions 
are  more  or  less  vivid,  agreeable  or  painful  convictions 
and  emotions.  The  decision  is  intuitive.  As  the  mo- 
tive and  the  voluntary  action  are  brought  into  compari- 
son with  the  binding  rule,  the  mind  sees  the  coinci- 
dence or  disagreement  with  such  force  of  conviction  as 
to  excite  corresponding  emotions.  The  intuitive  per- 
ception and  the  emotion  are  objects  of  thought,  which 
the  intellect  conceives  in  words.  The  initial  step  in 
this  process,  is  that  of  comparing  ,a  moral  act,  a  motive, 
a  state  of  feeling,  a  habit,  a  purpose,  or  the  like,  to  the 
rule  of  moral  obligation  and  accountable  agency,  which 
we  regard  as  binding  on  us.  Thus  a  man  is  convicted 
of  sin,  guilt,  just  obnoxiousness  to  punishment,  by  a 
comparison  of  his  moral  acts  with  the  Scripture  rule 
of  faith  and  duty  which  he  regards  as  of  binding  obli- 
gation on  him  as  a  moral  agent.  In  proportion  as  his 
intellect  is  excited  and  aroused  to  think  of  his  acts,  and 
of  the  rule  or  standard — the  moral  law  which  he  has  vio- 
lated— will  be  the  vividness  of  his  spontaneous,  intui- 

G* 


130  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

tive  perception  of  the  contrariety  of  his  acts  to  the  rule 
which  he  was  bound  to  obey.  The  rule  exists  prior  to 
the  act ;  and  whether  it  be  Scriptural  and  right,  or  un- 
scriptural  and  wrong,  he  is  voluntary  and  responsible 
in  choosing  and  adopting  it  as  his  rule.  The  intui- 
tional power  does  not  originate  or  give  authority  to  the 
rule.  It  is  not  itself  a  standard  of  right  and  wrong. 
It  is  not  itself  conscience.  The  Scriptural  rule  is  of 
Divine  prescription  and  authority.  All  other  rules  are 
without  authority.  The  intuitional  power  does  but 
perceive  the  conformity  or  the  contrariety  of  the  acts 
to  the  rule  to  which  they  are  compared. 

The  word  conscience  strictly  signifies  joint  knowledge, 
namelv,  of  a  Divine  law,  or  of  some  other  rule  of  moral 

^   I  I 

action,  and  of  specific  moral  acts,  to  be  compared  with 
such  rule.  A  knowledge  of  the  rule  is  as  absolutely 
prerequisite  as  is  the  commission  of  acts  to  be  com- 
pared with  the  rule.  Under  these  two  conditions  the 
intuitional  decision  of  conformity  or  non-conformity  re- 
sults spontaneously  and  unavoidably.  Knowledge  of 
the  rule,  joined  with  knowledge  of  the  acts,  brought 
into  comparison  with  the  rule  as  a  test,  is  conscience. 
The  intellectual  apprehension  of  the  judgment,  deci- 
sion, induction,  is  consciousness. 

Such  accordingly  is  the  view  of  the  subject  every 
where  exhibited  in  the  Scriptures.  The  Apostle  Paul, 
referring  to  his  own  personal  experience,  says  of  the 
manner  of  his  becoming  conscious  of  the  sinfulness  of 
his  acts,  "  I  had  not  known  sin,  but  by  the  law"'  -that 
is,  I  should  not  have  known,  realized,  been  conscious 
of,  the  sinfulness  of  particular  acts,  had  I  not  known 
that  the  law  forbade  those  acts.  "  For,"  he  adds  as  an 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  131 

illustration,  "I  had  not  known  selfish  desire  [to  be  sin- 
ful] except  the  law  had  said,  Thou  shalt  not  covet." 
..."  For  without  [a  knowledge  of]  the  law,  sin  [as 
to  my  consciousness]  was  dead,  .  .  .  but  when  the 
commandment  came,  [was  felt  to  be  obligatory  on  me, 
my  consciousness  of]  sin  revived.  .  .  .  Sin,  that  it 
might  appear  [to  be]  sin,  working  death  in  me  by  that 
which  is  good — [namely,  the  law] — that  sin  by  the  com- 
mandment— [by  being  brought  into  comparison  with 
the  commandment] — might  become  [be  perceived  to 
be]  exceeding  sinful."  With  the  purport  of  this, 
agrees  what  he  says  concerning  the  heathen:  "When 
the  Grentiles  which  have  not  the  [written]  law,  do  by 
nature  [pursuant  to  the  oral  law  of  the  natural  system] 
the  things  contained  in  the  [written]  law,  these  having 
not  the  [written]  law,  are  a  law  unto  themselves. 
Which  show  the  work  of  the  law  written  in  their 
hearts,  [the  work  demanded  by  the  written  law,  as  en- 
joined by  the  natural  law  and  retained  in  their  minds] 
— their  consciences  also — [their  joint  knowledge  of 
that  law  and  of  their  acts] — bearing  witness,  and  their 
thoughts  the  meanwhile  accusing,  or  else  excusing  one 
another" — that  is,  the  Gentiles,  comparing  their  acts  with 
the  natural  law — the  precepts  of  natural  religion,  or 
the  primary  oral  system  as  perpetuated  by  tradition — 
condemned,  or  approved  them,  as  they  coincided  with, 
or  were  contrary  to  that  system.  So,  when  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees  brought  to  Jesus,  one  whom  they  ac- 
cused of  having  broken  a  law  acknowledged  by  all  to 
be  obligatory,  to  see  whether  he  would  condemn  her ; 
their  design  being  to  try  him,  and,  if  possible,  to  find 
something  to  accuse  him  of.  At  first,  he  gave  no  heed 


132  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

to  them.  But  as  they  continued  to  call  for  His  decision 
in  the  case,  He  said :  "  He  that  is  without  sin  among 
you,  let  him  first  cast  a  stone  at  her.  .  .  .  And  they 
who  heard  this,  being  convicted  by  their  own  con- 
science, went  out  one  by  one."  (John  8.)  His  man- 
ner, and  the  test  to  which  he  subjected  them,  induced 
a  comparison  of  their  own  acts  with  the  law  which 
they  acknowledged,  which  instantly  caused  them  to 
condemn  themselves — to  perceive  and  feel  intuitively 
the  truth  which  the  joint  knowledge  of  their  acts  and 
the  law,  and  the  comparison  of  one  with  the  other, 
rendered  obvious  and  unavoidable. 

Examples  to  the  same  effect  occur  throughout  the 
Scriptures.  "When  the  brethren  of  Joseph,  in  their 
trouble,  recalled  their  cruel  treatment  of  him  and  com- 
pared it  with  the  rule  of  conduct  which  they  acknow- 
ledged to  be  obligatory,  they  said :  "  We  are  verily 
guilty  concerning  our  brother,  in  that  we  saw  the  an- 
guish of  his  soul,  when  he  blsought  us,  and  we  would 
not  hear."  "When  David  was  led  by  the  parable  of 
Nathan  to  compare  certain  acts  as  of  a  third  party  with 
the  rule  of  right,  he  clearly  perceived  the  wickedness  of 
those  acts,  and  his  conscience  dictated  and  constrained 
him  to  pronounce  the  sentence  of  death.  On  being  told 
that  he  was  the  guilty  man,  and  the  acts  referred  to,  as 
his,  being  specified,  the  decision  of  his  conscience 
recoiled  upon  himself;  and  he  said :  "I  have  sinned 
against  the  Lord." 

Those  who  treat  of  conscience  as  if  it  were  an 
original  mental  power,  a  faculty  as  it  were  of  om- 
niscience, or  at  least  of  spontaneous  perception  and 
knowledge  of  moral  truths — including  truths  which 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  133 

are  known  to  the  intellect  only  by  Divine  revelation 
and  by  instruction,  labor,  at  best,  to  very  little  pur- 
pose, in  their  attempts  at  elucidation.  They  conceive 
of  it  as  being  a  faculty  of  the  mind,  instead  of  its 
being  merely  an  effect  of  mental  action.  They  assume 
for  it  an  efficiency  and  competency  to  decide  sponta- 
neously and  involuntarily,  the  gravest  of  all  questions 
concerning  human  actions — the  question  of  sin  and 
guilt  or  the  contrary.  But  there  is  no  such  separate 
and  independent  faculty.  What  are  termed  the 
decisions  of  conscience,  are  but  intuitive  perceptions  of 
what  is  decided  and  made  obvious  by  the  comparison 
of  acts  with  a  known  and  acknowledged  rule.  Such 
decisions,  inductions,  results,  accordingly,  are  per- 
ceived, and  become  objects  of  thought,  only  while  the 
comparison  of  the  acts  with  the  rule  is  taking  place. 
The  rule  must  exist  independently  of  the  mind,  and 
must  be  known  and  be  deemed  to  be  obligatory  ;  and 
the  comparison  must  be  made,  or  no  agreement  or 
disagreement  will  be  perceived,  and  no  verdict  will 
be  rendered. 

A  late  writer  of  note  in  the  English  world,  observes, 
that :  "  Truths  are  known  to  us  in  two  wavs :' 'some  are 

*/ 

known  directly  and  of  themselves  ;  some  through  the 
medium  of  other  truths.  The  former  are  the  subject 
of  intuition,  or  consciousness  ;  the  latter  of  inference. 
The  truths  known  by  intuition  are  the  original  pre- 
mises from  which  all  others  are  inferred."  (3 fill's  Sys- 
tem of  Logic.)  This  dictum,  though  seemingly  just 
within  certain  limitations,  is  not  sound  in  the  latitude 
and  application  which  he  assigns  to  it ;  even  supposing 
him  to  intend  only  truths  of  which  we  have  logical 


134  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

evidence.  For  not  to  dwell  on  the  obvious  exception 
of  Eevealed  Truths — which  are  neither  subjects  of  in- 
tuition, nor  inferences  from  intuitional  premises ;  but 
of  which  we  have,  nevertheless,  evidence  as  logical  as 
we  can  have  of  any  other  truths :  it  is  more  than  our 
consciousness  will  warrant,  to  say,  that  all  the  other 
truths  which  we  know  are  inferred  from  those  which 
we  know  by  intuition.  For,  beyond  a  doubt,  intuitive 
perceptions  are  consequents  of  intellectual  conceptions 
and  cogitations  of  cognate  truths,  a  knowledge  of  which 
we  attain  by  instruction :  that  is,  the  act  of  intuitional 
perception  is  consequent  on  intellectual  action,  though 
the  truths  perceived  are  themselves  preexistent  and 
ultimate. 

Considered  in  relation  to  the  particular  truths  which 
we  know  intuitively,  it  is  apparently  correct  to  say  that 
we  infer  other  truths  from  them.  But  the  statement  of 
Mr.  Mill  does  not  appear  to  indicate  the  actual  pro- 
cess. It  implies  that  we  are  conscious  of  the  truths 
which  we  intuitively  perceive,  before  we  proceed  to 
infer  the  truths  of  which  the  intuitions  are  said  to  be  the 
premises.  Whereas  the  intuitions  themselves  do  not 
occur  except  as  they  are  excited  by  our  thinking  and 
being  conscious  of  the  correlate  truths.  In  the  order 
of  sequence  they  follow  our  intellectual  conceptions ; 
and  we  are  not  in  fact  conscious  of  them  until  we  are 
rendered  so  by  intellectually  conceiving  them  in 
words. 

Hence  the  absolute  necessity  to  us,  as  rational  and 
moral  creatures  capable  of  intuitions  and  of  voluntary 
intellectual  cogitation — of  thought  and  consciousness 
of  thought  in  words — both  of  literary  instruction  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  135 

of  Divine  Revelation.  Without  prior  instruction  our 
capacity  of  intellectual  cogitation  and  consciousness  is 
dormant.  Without  intellectual  cogitation  and  con- 
sciousness our  capacity  of  intuitions  is  dormant ;  and 
without  Divine  Revelation  we  should  remain  ignorant 
of  truths  which  it  is  most  essential  to  us  to  know,  but 
which  neither  our  capacity  of  intuition,  nor  our 
capacity  of  instruction  and  of  intellectual  cogitation, 
could  ever  supply. 

His  work,  his  premises  being  granted,  is  very  acute 
and  able  in  its  way,  and  is  a  subtle  and  potent 
auxiliary  to  the  "  Positive  Philosophy."  His  state- 
ment that  "  the  province  of  logic  is  that  portion  of  our 
knowledge  which  consists  of  inferences  from  truths 
previously  known,  .  .  .  and  that  logic  is  not  the 
science  of  belief,  but  the  science  of  proof  or  evidence,'' 
is  by  itself  unexceptionable.  But  the  towering  fallacy 
of  his  statements,  "  that  the  truths  known  by  intuition 
are  the  original  premises  from  which  all  other  truths 
are  inferred  ;  that  the  province  of  Logic  is  that  portion 
only  of  our  knowledge  which  consists  of  such  infer- 
ences ;  and  that  intuitive  truths  are  themselves  without 
evidence,  as  if  their  being  to  our  consciousness,  self- 
evident,  was  no  evidence,  and  did  not  therefore  justify 
their  being  taken,  as  he  himself  declares  them  to  be, 
the  original  premises  of  all  deductive  truths,  is  fatal  to 
the  inferences  which  he  logically  deduces  from  .them. 

Because  we  intuitively  perceive  certain  truths,  he 
assumes  that  we  possess  a  knowledge  of  these  truths 
prior  to  our  receiving  any  instruction,  direct  or  indi- 
rect, concerning  them,  the  subject  of  them,  or  the  cor- 
relates which  they  imply ;  which  as  plainly  implies 


136  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

omniscience,  as  that  attribute  would  be  implied  by  the 
assumption  that  we  perceive  and  know  the  form,  color, 
and  other  qualities  of  an  external  object  prior  to  our 
first  seeing  it  by  the  instrumentality  of  the  organ 
of  vision.  He  confounds  the  capacity  of  intuition — 
of  mentally  seeing,  under  certain  conditions  of  in- 
tellectual action,  which  render  the  intuitions  obvious 
and  unavoidable — with  the  acquired  knowledge  and 
consciousness  implied  in  these  conditions.  He,  in 
short,  inverts  the  order  of  our  mental  phenomena. 
We  are  not  conscious  of  perceiving  truths  intuitively, 
or  of  inferring  from  them  other  cognate  or  collateral 
truths,  till  after  we  have  acquired  knowledge  enough  of 
those  other  truths  to  conceive  them  intellectually  in 
words.  But  when  we  conceive  and  are  conscious  of 
them  in  words,  we  intuitively  perceive  the  primary 
truths  which  they  imply,  conceive  them  intellectually 
in  words,  and  assign  them  their  place  as  primary  truths 
and  premises  from  which  the  cognate  truths  previously 
learned  and  conceived  in  words,  are  logically  inferable. 
It  is  at  this  point  that  logic  steps  in  formally  to  deduce 
the  truths  previously  known  by  instruction  from  the 
intuitive  self-evident  premises,  and  thereby  formally  to 
evince  and  prove  that  they  are  truths. 

This  conclusion  is  the  more  apparent  when  we  con- 
sider that  an  inference  of  truths  from  premises  pre- 
viously known,  is  not,  as  Mr.  Mill  assumes,  an  infer- 
ence exclusively  from  truths,  as  premises,  which  we 
previously  knew  by  intuition.  The  logical  process  is 
as  legitimate  and  as  conclusive,  when  applied  the  other 
way — that  is,  when,  knowing  certain  truths  by  instruc- 
tion, we  infer  from  them  as  premises  the  very  truths 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCKIPTURES.  137 

which  we  characterize  as  intuitional.  This,  indeed,  if  it 
be  not  the  only,  is  the  ordinary  way,  by  which  our  per- 
ception of  truths  by  intuition  is  occasioned.  It  is  the 
intellectual  cogitation  of  truths  which  we  have  learned 
by  instruction,  that  induces  and  gives  occasion  for,  the 
intuitive  perception  of  those  related,  implied,  primary 
truths,  from  which,  as  premises,  we  in  turn  infer  the 
very  truths  with  which  the  process  commenced. 

An  intuition  can  not  be  stated  or  contemplated  as  a 
premise,  till  it  has  been  perceived,  and  has  been  real- 
ized to  our  consciousness  by  being  intellectually  con- 
ceived in  words.  It  can  not  be  perceived  till  we  intel- 
lectually conceive  in  words  such  cognate  truths  as 
make  it  obvious,  and  render  the  perception  of  it 
unavoidable.  It  is  perceived,  not  as  a  premise,  but 
simply  as  a  distinct  primary  truth.  It  is  perceived, 
not  at  pleasure  by  an  independent  act  of  the  mind,  but 
of  necessity  as  a  consequence  of  the  intellectual  action 
in  thinking  of  cognate  truths.  After  these  con- 
ditions are  fulfilled,  it  is  within  the  province  of  Logic, 
as  a  premise — as  a  primary  general  truth,  arrived  at, 
as  all  other  general  propositions  are  by  the  instrument- 
ality of  distinct  intellectual  cogitation  in  words.  In 
this  process,  such  distinct  intellectual  action  supplies 
the  instruction  and  knowledge  which  is  prerequisite  to 
intuition.  "We  have  learned  and  intellectually  conceive 
truths  which  clearly  and  indubitably  imply,  and  which 
necessitate  the  perception  of,  other  truths,  which  the 
mind  therefore  intuitively  perceives. 

This,  we  venture  to  say,  is  the  process,  to  which  our 
experience  and  consciousness,  unbiased  by  theory,  and 
unembarrassed  by  prejudice,  unequivocally  testify. 


138  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

B  j  nature,  at  the  outset  of  our  existence,  we  are  as  en- 
tirely without  knowledge  of  one  class  of  truths  as  of 
any  other.  All  the  knowledge  which  we  afterwards 
acquire  or  receive,  we  acquire  or  receive  through  some 
instrumentality,  which,  in  the  constitution  of  things 
established  by  the  Creator,  is  adapted  and  adjusted  to 
our  nature,  our  capacities,  our  necessities,  and  our  re- 
sponsibilities. As  we  emerge  into  existence  as  moral 
agents,  and  from  infancy  to  maturity,  and  from  ma- 
turity in  our  earthly  to  our  immortal  unearthly  exist- 
ence, the  constitution  of  things  which  He  has  estab- 
lished, works  in  harmony  with  our  capacities.  Our 
capacities  of  sensation,  of  sensational  perception,  of 
volition,  of  intellectual  conception  and  consciousness 
of  thoughts  in  words,  of  intuitive  perceptions,  of  emo- 
tions, of  memory,  of  comparison,  of  induction  and 
reasoning  or  logic,  of  vocal  and  chirographic  expres- 
sion of  our  thoughts,  of  all  the  phenomena  of  created 
minds,  are  rendered  effective,  stimulated,  excited  to 
action,  by  appropriate,  adequate,  effective  instrumen- 
talities, which  are  provided  and  preadjusted  in  the  con- 
stitution of  things.  This  is  not  more  true  of  any  one 
of  our  natural  capacities,  than  it  is  of  that  of  acquiring 
knowledge  by  instruction.  Undoubtedly  the  capacity 
of  intuitively  perceiving  primary  self-evident  truths, 
under  appropriate  conditions  and  excitements,  is  a  con- 
stituent of  our  nature,  as  the  capacity  of  perceiving  and 
distinguishing  external  objects  under  appropriate  con- 
ditions, is  of  our  nature,  and  as  the  capacity  of  in- 
tellectually conceiving  and  becoming  conscious  of 
thoughts,  is  of  our  nature.  But  who  can  pretend  to 
say,  that  knowledge  of  primary,  mathematical,  moral,  or 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCKIPTUEES.  139 

theological  truths,  for  the  acquisition  of  which  these 
and  other  capacities  are  given,  exists  in  us  as  an  object 
of  intuitive  perception,  or  of  intellectual  cogitation, 
prior  to  and  independently  of  the  acquisition  of  it  by 
instruction  ?  Were  that  true,  why  were  the  capaci- 
ties of  acquiring  that  knowledge  by  instruction  super- 
added  ?  Why,  after  all,  is  any  instruction  necessary  ? 
If  some  truths,  instead  of  being  merely  perceived,  re- 
cognized,  to  be  truths,  by  intuition,  are  known,  con- 
sciously known,  and  comprehended  intuitively,  as  if  they 
had  been  learned  by  instruction,  and  if  all  other  truths 
known  to  us  are  inferred  from  those,  why  do  we  not 
intuitively  deduce  those  inferences  ?  Why  is  instruc- 
tion, and  voluntary  intellectual  action  —  cogitation, 
reasoning — necessary  to  the  making  of  those  in- 
ferences ? 

On  the  contrary  :  intuition  is  an  effect  of  intellectual 
action,  as  our  perceptions  of  external  objects  are  effects 
of  sensations,  and  as  our  emotions  are  effects  of  mental 
cogitation.  And  since  in  our  intuitive  perceptions  the 
mind  acts  immediately,  without  the  intervention  of 
words,  and  in  thinking  it  acts  and  becomes  conscious 
of  acting,  through  the  intervention  of  words  as  its  in- 
struments, there  is,  manifestly,  a  radical  formal  distinc- 
tion between  these  two  modes  of  mental  efficiency ; 

«/     / 

though  intuition  takes  place  conjointly  with  the  volun- 
tary act  of  thinking,  as  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that 
our  intuitions  are,  in  every  instance,  exclusively  such 
as  coincide  with  the  present  subject  of  thought.  And 
since  we  are  not  conscious  of  our  intuitions  till  we 
think  of  them  in  words,  to  speak  of  them  as  know- 
ledges— as  being  known  and  consciously  realized,  prior 


140  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

to  our  acquiring  any  other  knowledge,  or  exercising 
the  power  of  intellectual  cogitation  in  words,  is  as 
solecistical  and  contrary  to  experience,  as  it  is  to 
speak  of  our  seeing  physical  objects  in  the  absence  of 
light  or  with  bandaged  eyes.  They  are  immediate  per- 
ceptions of  truths,  which,  being  perceived,  are  like 
sensitive  perceptions,  objects  of  thought  in  words. 
The  mind  directly  apprehends  the  truth  which  it  in- 
tuitively perceives.  The  truth  exists  independently 
of  its  being  apprehended.  The  involuntary  spontane- 
ous apprehension  or  recognition  of  it,  does  not  consti- 
tute an  act  of  which  at  that  stage  we  are  conscious.  A 
further  mental  act  is  necessary.  The  intuitive  percep- 
tion brings  the  truth  into  such  an  attitude  or  relation 
to  the  mind,  as  to  make  it  an  object  of  intellectual 
cogitation — of  voluntary  thought  in  words  ;  and  it  is 
then  only,  when  we  think  it  in  words  that  we  become 
conscious  of  it.  Then,  by  its  in  variableness  as  a  truth, 
and  by  our  unavoidable  perception  of  it,  under  the  re- 
quisite conditions,  it  is  a  basis,  regulator,  test,  of  our 
acquired,  intellectual  knowledge,  conception,  cogita- 
tion of  related  truths.  When  we  conceive  these  ac- 
quired truths,  the  intuition  occurs,  is  intellectually  con- 
ceived in  words,  and  is  thereby  realized  to  our  con- 
sciousness. Such,  at  least,  appears  to  us  to  be  the 
process ;  and  it  appears  to  us  wholly  to  preclude  the 
reception,  or  conveyance  into  our  minds,  of  revealed 
truths  unverbally,  or  independently  of  words.  For  a 
revelation,  or  an  inspiration,  the  effect  of  which  was 
only  to  bring  the  revealed  truths  within  the  power  of 
intuition,  would  not  supply  the  prerequisite  intellectual 
action  which  excites  that  power,  nor  provide  in  any 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES. 

way  for  our  becoming  conscious  of  them.  So  far  as 
we  can  conceive,  a  revelation  by  Divine  Inspiration 
must  be  made  to  the  mind  without  words,  or  it  must 
be  made  in  words.  It  can  not  consist  of  sensations  or 
emotions.  If  made  in  words,  the  mind,  as  it  was  re- 
ceived, would  be  conscious  of  it.  If  made  without 
words,  neither  the  consciousness  necessary  to  the  ex- 
pression of  it  in  writing,  nor  any  consciousness  of  it, 
would  be  occasioned ;  and  it  would  be  necessary  to  sup- 
pose it  to  be  a  condition  precedent  to  a  revelation,  that 
the  recipient  should  have  learned  truths  cognate  to 
those  to  be  revealed,  and  to  be  thinking  of  them  at  the 
moment  of  a  revelation,  so  as  to  be  excited  to  perceive 
these  revealed  truths  by  intuition. 

IT.  Sir  William  Hamilton's  "  Philosophy  of  Common-Sense — or  our 
primary  beliefs  considered  as  the  ultimate  criterion  of  truth,"  shown 
to  afford  no  support  to  the  notion  of  revelations  being  discovered  by 
intuition. 

The  terms  intuitive  and  intuition  are  employed  to  sig- 
nify those  acts  of  mental  perception,  (whether  defined 
as  perceptions,  cognitions,  convictions,  or  beliefs,) 
which  are  immediate,  involuntary,  and  spontaneous; 
and  which  occur  unavoidably  with  respect  to  the 
truths,  facts,  or  whatever  phenomena  they  relate  to, 
when  the  attention  of  the  intellect  is  occupied  in  think- 
ing of  collateral  truths  which  pre-suppose,  involve,  and 
imply  them.  To  the  mind  under  the  requisite  condi- 
tion of  excitement,  they  are  obvious,  spontaneous,  and 
involuntary,  as  acts  of  visual  perceptions  are,  when  the 
eye  is  opened  in  the  presence  of  visible  objects.  When 
we  think  for  the  first  time  of  a  particular  truth  or  fact, 


142  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

the  appropriate  intuition,  the  perception  of  the  correl- 
late  truth  then  occurs  for  the  first  time.  When  we 
afterwards  think  of  the  same  truth  or  fact  in  the  same 
connection,  the  same  intuition  recurs,  not  indeed  sim- 
ply as  a  mental  perception  unassociated  with  memory, 
but  as  an  object  of  thought  in  the  given  connection. 
At  this  point  our  intuitions  are  by  many,  and  not  im- 
properly, called  cognitions,  convictions,  beliefs,  and  by 
various  other  terms  of  analogous  import. 

Hence  Sir  William  Hamilton,  regarding  them  in  all 
the  aspects  in  which  they  occur  in  our  experience,  and 
which  are  indicated  in  the  nomenclatures  of  different 
authors,  comprises  them  under  the  term  Common-sense, 
to  signify  comprehensively  those  primary  mental  per- 
ceptions— cognitions,  convictions,  beliefs — in  which  all 
men  agree.  With  respect  to  these  mental  phenomena, 
the  first  question  behooves  to  be,  Whether  as  realized 
to  our  consciousness,  they  involve  the  necessity  of  con- 
cluding, that  the  mind  is  gifted  with  knowledge  natu- 
rally, and  prior  to  instruction  ?  that  is,  knowledge  of 
the  truths  which  we  intuitively,  involuntarily,  and 
spontaneously  perceive.  The  affirmative  of  this  ques- 
tion would  seem  to  have  been  positively  held  by  many 
philosophical  writers,  both  of  ancient  and  modern 
times,  and  to  be  at  least  tacitly  held  by  all.  They  are 
brought  to  this  conclusion  probably,  by  confounding, 
or  failing  to  distinguish  between  that  class  of  involun- 
tary mental  acts  which  we  properly  call  intuitions,  and 
that  class  of  voluntary  acts  which  we  call  intellectual 
cogitations,  and  which  largely  comprise  antecedent  in- 
tuitions. There  is  a  broad  line  of  distinction  between 
the  two.  The  first  are  not  only  spontaneous,  but  they 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  143 

are  immediate.  The  second  are  not  only  determined 
by  the  will,  but  they  include  the  mediate  intervention 
of  words,  and  depend  on  a  previously  acquired  know- 
ledge of  words  and  of  what  they  signify.  It  is  clear 
that  prior  to  our  first  intuitive  perceptions  of  particular 
truths,  there  can  be  in  the  mind  no  such  knowledge  of 
those  truths  as  the  direct  intellectual  cogitation  of  them 
requires  ;  and  therefore  if  there  is  in  fact  any  knowledge 
of  them  whatever,  it  must  be  an  original  natural  en- 
dowment ;  for  prior  to  any  intellectual  cogitation,  no 
knowledge  of  any  truths  could  possibly  be  acquired. 
But  the  supposition  that  there  is  in  the  mind,  prior  to 
instruction  and  intellectual  cogitation,  a  knowledge  of 
the  truths  which  under  certain  conditions,  we  intui- 
tively perceive,  is  not  sustained  by  our  consciousness, 
and  is  in  fact  inconceivable ;  and  if  our  intuitions  are 
to  be  traced  back  to  this  supposition,  they  must  be  re- 
garded as  inexplicable  and  beyond  our  comprehension. 
Probably  the  writers  who  have  treated  of  this  sub- 
ject, even  the  best  of  them,  have  ascribed  to  the 
mental  power  of  intuitive  perception,  a  great  deal  more 
than  actually  proceeds  from  it ;  as  he  who  should  as- 
cribe to  the  mental  power  of  perceiving  external  ob- 
jects through  the  medium  of  the  eye,  a  perception  of 
all  that  pertained  to  those  objects,  or  of  any  thing  more 
than  what  was  distinctly  visible,  and  of  which  the  per- 
ception would  be  involuntary  and  spontaneous,  would 
ascribe  to  that  power  what  was  beyond  its  capacity  and 
out  of  its  sphere.  Our  visual  perceptions  are  as  truly 
acts  of  the  mind  as  our  intuitions  ;  but  they  do  not 
necessarily  require  or  imply  any  prior  knowledge  of 
the  things  perceived.  They  include  only  what  is  mani- 


144  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

fest  and  obvious  concerning  those  things,  under  the 
conditions  in  which  they  occur.  So  our  intuitions,  un- 
der the  conditions  in  which  they  occur,  include  truths 
which  are  obvious  and  can  not  but  be  perceived  under 
those  conditions.  The  conditions  include  a  present  ac- 
tion of  the  intellect — cogitation — concerning  correlate 
or  adjunct  truths  of  which  a  knowledge  has  been  ac- 
quired by  instruction.  By  that  knowledge  and  intel- 
lectual action  the  known  truths  are  brought  into  the 
view  of  the  mind,  in  such  a  relation,  that  the  correlate, 
implied,  intuitive  truths,  are  rendered  obvious  ;  so  that 
the  mind  unavoidably  perceives  and  recognizes  them 
as  truths.  It  sees  them  by  the  light  of  the  known 
truths  which  are  the  present  subject  of  cogitation.  The 
perception  is,  according  to  the  constitution  of  the 
mind,  consequent  on  such  intellectual  cogitation;  as 
the  perception  of  external  objects  is  consequent  on  the 
exposure  of  visible  objects  to  the  eye. 

The  gifted  author  above  mentioned,  in  his  "Philoso- 
phy of  Common- Sense — or  our  primary  beliefs  consid- 
ered as  the  ultimate  criterion  of  truth" — deals  with  our 
intuitive  perceptions  as  original  cognitions,  and  as 
though  we  were  conscious  of  them  as  concrete  proposi- 
tions, independently  of  any  intellectual  conception  of 
them  in  words.  He  says:  "Our  cognitions,  it  is  evi- 
dent, are  not  all  at  second  hand.  Consequents  can  not, 
by  an  infinite  regress,  be  evolved  out  of  antecedents, 
which  are  themselves  only  consequents.  Demonstra- 
tion, if  proof  be  possible,  behooves  us  to  repose  at  last 
on  propositions,  which  carrying  their  own  evidence, 
necessitate  their  own  admission  ;  and  which,  being  as 
primary,  inexplicable,  as  inexplicable,  incomprehensi- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  145 

ble,  must  consequently  manifest  themselves  less  in  the 
character  of  cognitions  than  of  facts  of  which  conscious- 
ness assures  us  under  the  simple  form  of  feeling  or  be- 
lief" (Philosophy  of  Sir  William  Hamilton.  Apple- 
ton's  Ed.  1855.) 

In   this   paragraph   at  the   commencement   of    his 
Treatise,  intuitions — intuitive   knowledges,  cognitions 
— are  contemplated  as  propositions,  which  carry  their 
own  evidence  and  necessitate  their  own  admission ;  and 
yet,  because  they  are  primary,  they  are  held  to  be  in- 
explicable  and  incomprehensible — and,  therefore,  as 
necessarily  becoming  manifest  rather  as  facts  of  feeling 
and  belief,  than  as  knowledge,  or  cognized  propositions. 
Surely  the  terms  or  the  purport  of  a  proposition  which 
is  inexplicable  and  incomprehensible,  can   hardly  be 
said  to  be  manifested  in  a  consciousness  of  feeling  or 
belief;  and  to  speak  of  propositions,  which  are  inexplic- 
able and  incomprehensible,  as  being  cognized,  compre- 
hended, understood,  is,  in  an  extreme  degree,  solecistical. 
The  truth  we  apprehend  to  be,  that  while  we  have 
innumerable  intuitions,  they  are  not  propositions,  but 
only  mental  perceptions,  under  certain  conditions,  of 
simple  and  obvious,  or  necessary  truths.     The  fact  that 
we  perceive  them,  supersedes  and  precludes  the  neces- 
sity of  any  other  evidence  of  their  truth,  or  of  any 
explanation  of  them.     In  what  respect  they  are  less 
comprehensible,  or  less  to  be  relied  on,  as  the  basis  of 
intellectual  cogitation  and  consciousness  in  words,  than 
our  visual  perceptions  of  external  objects,  is  by  no 
means  apparent.     When  we  open  our  eyes  and  see  the 
sun,  we  need  no  extrinsic  evidence  to  demonstrate  to 
us  that  we  perceive  that  luminary ;  nor  is  the  truth  of 
the  fact  that  we  perceive  it,  in  any  way  affected  by 

7 


146  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

the  question  whether  the  perception,  and  the  object  per- 
ceived, are,  or  are  not,  inexplicable  and  incomprehen- 
sible. So  with  immediate  mental  perceptions.  What 
we  intuitively  perceive  is,  therefore,  true  and  to  be 
relied  on,  whether  explicable  and  comprehensible  or 
not.  Back  of  the  intuitive  perception  we  know 
nothing ;  it  is,  therefore,  ultimate  and  conclusive  to 
us,  and  we  necessarily  rely  upon  it  as  a  basis  of  intel- 
lectual cogitation  and  consciousness  in  words. 

The  facts,  that  intuitive  perceptions  are  alike  in  dif- 
ferent minds,  and  that,  under  the  same  conditions, 
every  mind  will  have  spontaneously  the  same  intui- 
tions, are  of  great  significance  in  this  discussion.  They 
demonstrate  that  the  truths  perceived  are  founded  in 
the  immutable  natures  and  relations  of  things.  They 
depend  in  no  degree  on  our  volition.  They  are  tests 
of  the  truthfulness  and  accuracy  of  our  acquired  know- 
ledge, of  our  intellectual  convictions,  and  of  our  moral 
feelings ;  and  are,  in  these  relations  only,  realized  to 
our  consciousness  as  subjects  of  thought  in  words. 
Being  from  the  constitution,  capacities,  and  mode  of 
efficient  action,  of  the  human  mind,  necessary  percep- 
tions, they  are  ultimate  and  unquestionable.  They 
can  not  be  hindered,  contradicted,  or  modified,  by  any 
other  mental  action,  any  opposite  deliverances  of  con- 
sciousness, or  any  acquired  knowledge.  That  which 
we  intuitively  perceive,  and  of  the  perception  of  which 
we  are  conscious,  can  be  doubted  and  denied  only  upon 
assumptions  which  would  equally  justify  doubt  and 
denial  of  our  existence. 

But  as  is  hinted  above,  a  great  deal  more  is  ascribed 
to  intuition  than  is  due  to  that  exercise  of  mental  power. 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTUKES. 

It  is  made  to  trench  largely  on  the  domain  of  intellect- 
ual action — to  include  what  we  learn  by  instruction, 
observation,  and  experience,  our  cogitation,  conception, 
and  consciousness  of  thoughts  in  words — all  the  mental 
phenomena  of  which  we  are  conscious.  This  will  ap- 
pear from  a  glance  at  "The  Nomenclature,  that  is,  the 
various  appellations,  by  which  the  principles  of  com- 
mon-sense have  been  designated ;"  as  exhibited  in 
"  The  Philosophy  of  Common-Sense."  The  first  of 
these  designations  is  that  of  immediacy;  concerning 
which  the  author  observes  that :  "In  our  primitive 
cognitions  we  apprehend  existence  at  once,  and  without 
the  intervention  of  aught  between  the  apprehending 
mind  and  the  existence  apprehended."  Here  the  words 
" cognitions"  and  "existence,"  give  a  wide  and  indefi- 
nite reference  to  the  mental  apprehensions ;  as  if  their 
province  included  knowledge  in  a  sense  equivalent  to 
acquired  intellectual  knowledge,  and  existence,  in  the 
sense  of  phenomena  in  general.  The  immediacy  is  in- 
disputable ;  but  it  is  the  immediacy  of  perception.  And 
but  for  comprising  too  much  in  the  "  principles  of 
common-sense,"  the  explanatory  comment  would  only 
indicate  that,  "in  our  intuitive  perceptions  we  apprehend 
truths  at  once,  and  without  the  intervention  of  aught 
between  the  apprehending  mind,  and  the  truth  appre- 
hended." 

"The  second  condition,  which,  along  with  their  im- 
mediacy, seems  to  have  determined  a  class  of  names,  is 
the  incomprehensibility  or  inexplicability  of  our  original 
cognitions"  The  author's  comments  under  this  head, 
imply  that  "cognitions"  comprise  far  more  than  simple 
mental  perceptions.  He  employs  the  terms,  original 


148  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

cognitions  and  immediate  knowledge,  as  equivalent.  And 
to  illustrate  the  alleged  inexplicability,  he  says:  uLet 
us  suppose  an  act  of  immediate  knowledge  [an  intuitive 
perception] — By  external  or  internal  perception,  I  ap- 
prehend a  phenomenon  of  mind  or  matter,  as  existing ; 
I  therefore  affirm  it  to  be.  Now  if  asked  how  I  know, 
or  am  assured,  that  what  I  apprehend  as  a  mode  of 
mind  may  not  be,  in  reality,  a  mode  of  matter,  or  that 
what  I  apprehend  as  a  mode  of  matter  may  not,  in 
reality,  be  a  mode  of  mind,  I  can  only  say,  using  the 
simplest  language,  I  know  it  to  be  true,  because  I  feel 
and  can  not  but  feel,  qr  because  I  believe  and  can  not 
but  believe  it  so  to  be." 

Now  an  external  perception  is  not  immediate.  The 
eye  or  some  other  organ  is  interposed  and  is  an  indis- 
pensable condition.  It  therefore  lacks  some  essential 
characteristics  of  intuition,  and  is  by  no  means  to  be 
classed  with  intuitive  mental  perceptions.  And  on 
the  other  hand,  feeling  and  believing  are  not  intuitions, 
or  intuitive  perceptions,  but  indubitably  are  conse- 
quents of  intuitive  perceptions,  and  of  intellectual  con- 
ceptions. The  intuitive  perception  of  a  truth  may 
excite  emotion  and  feeling;  and  the  intellectual  con- 
ception of  a  truth,  or  proposition,  or  fact,  may  have  the 
same  effect.  But  the  feeling  excited  is  as  distinguish- 
able from  the  intuition  as  from  the  conception.  The 
feeling  excited  by  an  intellectual  conception  is  no  cer- 
tain evidence  of  the  truth  of  that  conception.  Intel- 
lectual conceptions,  which  are  wholly  erroneous  and 
unfounded,  may,  nevertheless,  excite  feeling.  And  to 
say  that  one  feels  his  internal  perceptions  to  be  true, 
can  hardly  be  taken  as  evidence  of  any  thing  more 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTUEES.  149 

than  that  he  feels  in  consequence  of  his  perceptions  and 
in  accordance  with  them. 

"  The  third  quality,  in  reference  to  which  our  prim- 
ary cognitions  [knowledges]  have  obtained  certain 
appellations,  is  their  originality.'1''  Whence  they  are 
called  primary,  primitive,  ultimate,  etc.  The  fourth  is 
that  they  "  are  natural,  not  conventional — native,  not 
acquired."  The  fifth  is,  "  the  necessity  of  those  cogni- 
tions." The  sixth,  "that  they  afford  the  conditions 
and  regulative  principles  of  all  knowledge."  Which, 
of  course,  must  be  taken  to  mean  all  acquired  know- 
ledge. The  seventh  is,  "their  universality,  this  being 
at  once  the  consequence  of  their  necessity,  and  its  index." 
"  The  eighth  is,  their  presumed  trustworthiness,  either  as 
veracious  enouncements,  or  as  accurate  tests  of  truth. 
Hence  in  the  one  relation  they  have  been  styled  truths, 
first,  primary,  etc.,  and  in  the  other  criteria,  natural, 
authentic,"  etc. 

"  The  ninth  is,  that  the  principles  of  knowledge, 
must  be  themselves  knowledges."  The  author  himself, 
under  the  third  of  these  specifications — that  of  origin- 
ality— defines  the  word  principles  to  mean,  "  literally 
commencements — points  of  departure,"  with  reference 
to  the  phrases,  "principles  of  common-sense — princi- 
ples of  thought,  reason,  judgment,  intelligence."  And 
under  the  first  head  he  cites  as  an  "appellation  deter- 
mined by  the  condition  of  immediacy,  that  of  intuitions 
— intuitive  cognitions,  [knowledges,]  notions,  judg- 
ments." Besides  its  original  meaning,  that  of  a  visual 
perception,  he  observes  that  "the  term  intuition  has 
been  employed  to  denote  a  kind  of  apprehension,  and 
a  kind  of  judgment — to  denote  a  perception  of  the 


150  THE  PLENAKY  INSPIRATION 

actual  and  present — to  denote  an  immediate  apprehen- 
sion of  a  thing  in  itself,  in  contrast  to  a  representative, 
vicarious,  or  mediate  apprehension  of  it,  in  or  through 
something  else — to  denote  the  immediate  affirmation 
by  the  intellect,  that  the  predicate  does  or  does  not 
pertain  to  the  subject,  in  what  are  called  self-evident 
propositions — to  denote  perception  proper  (the  object- 
ive) in  contrast  to  sensation  proper,  (the  subjective,)  in 
our  sensitive  consciousness — to  denote  the  knowledge 
which  we  can  adequately  represent  in  imagination,  in 
contradistinction  to  the  'symbolical'  knowledge  which 
we  can  not  image,  but  only  think  or  conceive,  through 
and  under  a  sign  or  word."  "  All  these  meanings  ex 
cept  the  last,"  he  further  observes,  "  have  this  in  com- 
mon, that  they  express  the  condition  of  an  immediate, 
in  opposition  to  a  mediate  knowledge.  It  is,  therefore, 
easy  to  see  how  the  term  was  suggested  in  its  applica- 
tion to  our  original  cognitions,  and  how  far  it  marks 
out  their  distinctive  character." 

Now  we  submit,  that  the  term  cognition,  knowledge, 
is  improperly  applied  to  that  mental  act  or  class  of 
acts,  which  we  denominate  intuitive  perceptions,  and 
involves  what  is  not  immediate,  original,  natural, 
necessary,  or  universal,  namely,  knowledge  which  we 
acquire  by  instruction,  and  which  is  not,  like  intuition, 
spontaneous  and  involuntary.  And,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  all  that  ought  to  be  or  can  legitimately,  be  com- 
prised, in  the  doctrine  of  Common-Sense,  has  the  above 
specified  characteristics,  and  is  restricted  to  the  invol- 
untary acts  of  intuitive  perception ;  or  else  that  the 
doctrine  of  Common-Sense  is  far  more  comprehensive 
than  the  doctrine  of  immediate,  natural,  necessary,  in- 
tuition. 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  151 

The  fact  that  the  terms  of  nomenclature  which  he 
cites  have  been  used  by  the  authors  to  whom  he  refers, 
is  undoubted.     But  they  do  not  prove  that  the  mental 
act  in  question,  is  any  thing  else  but  simple,  involun- 
tary perception.     The  mental  act  which  is  immediate, 
original,  natural,   necessary,   universal,   is  not  know- 
ledge.    It  is  an  act;  knowledge  is  an  effect.     When 
by  an  involuntary  act  of  the  mind  a  truth  is  perceived, 
we  may  indeed  be  said  to  know  it.     It  has  then  be- 
come an  object  of  intellectual  cognizance,  conception, 
cogitation,  thought  in  words,   consciousness,  memory. 
But  the  act  itself  is  not  knowledge,  nor  is  the  imme- 
diate effect  of  the  act  knowledge,  but  perception  of 
truths  in  certain  relations,  and  under  certain  necessary 
conditions.     These  perceptions  do  not  occur  independ- 
ently and  at  random.     No  man  is  conscious  of  them 
separately  and  independently  of  his  acquired  know- 
ledge, and  intellectual  conception,  of  other  and  allied 
truths,    which   suggest   or   imply   them.     The  whole 
question  turns  upon  the  act.     Mental  intuition  is  men- 
tal seeing,  looking  on,  the  act  by  which  the  mind  im- 
mediately perceives  truths,  without  argument  or  testi- 
mony.     Knowledge,   at  least  in  the  ordinary  use  of 
the  term,  is  an  intellectual  acquisition,  not  a  natural, 
necessary,  original,  immediate  possession.     It  implies 
more  than  simple  perception,  as  a  knowledge  of  visible 
objects   implies    more    than    is   mediately  perceived 
through  the  eye.     It  implies  intellectual  conception, 
consciousness,  and  memory  in  words. 

To  say  then  that  the  principles  of  our  knowledge — 
the  commencements,  the  points  of  departure — which 
can  not  strictly  be  taken  to  mean  any  other  than 


152  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

natural,  necessary,  immediate,  original  intuitions,  for 
all  other  "  points  of  departure"  are  attained  by  instruc- 
tion— must  be  themselves  knowledges,  is  to  ascribe  to 
the  involuntary  acts  in  question  what  does  not  belong 
to  them ;  or  else  the  thing  affirmed  in  the  sentence,  is 
that  the  knowledges  of  our  knowledge,  are  know- 
ledges. For  the  sentence  itself  shows  that  the  words, 
knowledges  and  principles  of  our  knowledge,  are  em- 
ployed as  equivalents.  And  this  is  confirmed  by  the 
author's  illustrations  under  this  head.  He  says :  "  The 
principles  of  our  knowledge,  if  viewed  as  cognitions, 
in  general,  have  been  called, 

1st.  Cognitions  or  knowledges,  with  the  discriminative 
attributes,  first,  primary,  ultimate,  original,  fundamental, 
elemental,  natural  .  .  .  native,  innate,  etc.,  etc. 

2d.  Facts,  data,  revelations,  etc.,  of  consciousness. 

3d.  Notions,  conceptions,  pre-notions. 

4th.  As  complex  cognitions — self-evident,  intuitive, 
natural,  common,  a  priori,  etc.,  judgments,  proposi- 
tions." 

Now  all  this  may  belong  to  the  doctrine  of  Common- 
Sense  as  exhibited  in  this  treatise,  but  it  includes  me- 
diate acquired  knowledge,  which  does  not  belong  to 
the  doctrine  of  immediate  intuitive  acts  of  the  mind. 
If,  therefore,  revelation  and  inspiration  are  from  with- 
out, and  if  it  is  their  object  to  impart  knowledge,  to 
teach  original  truths,  doctrines,  facts,  then  what  they 
teach  can  not  be  perceived  by  immediate  intuition,  and 
they  can  not  be  made  through  a  power,  the  exclusive 
exercise  of  which  is  immediate,  involuntary,  necessary, 
and  universal. 

That  intuition  is  simply  mental  seeing  or  perception, 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  153 

excited  by  the  intellectual  apprehension  of  related  truths, 
is  taught  by  Sir  William  Hamilton  in  his  translations, 
and  comments  on  the  doctrine  of  the  authors  whom  he 
quotes.  Thus  he  interprets  a  passage  of  Aristotle : 
"  When  we  once  become  aware  of  the  sense  of  the 
terms  whole  and  part,  then  the  intellect  of  itself  spon- 
taneously enounces  the  axiom — the  whok  is  greater  than 
its  part."  (P.  89.)  That  is,  the  intuition  does  not 
precede,  but  follows,  or  is  occasioned  by  the  action  of 
the  intellect  in  thinking  of  the  terms  whole  and  part — 
thinking  what  had  been  learned  by  instruction  of  the 
meaning  of  those  terms.  The  intellect  apprehends  the 
import  of  the  terms  in  their  necessary  relation,  and 
thereupon  spontaneously  perceives  and  enounces  the 
axiom  which  that  relation  implies. 

The  genuine  doctrine  of  Aristotle,  as  represented  by 
Duns  Scotus,  is  thus  exhibited.  (P.  101.)  "  On  the 
one  hand  he  maintains  (against  Averroes)  that  princi- 
ples are  not,  in  a  certain  sense,  innate  in  the  intellect ; 
that  is,  not  as  actual  cognitions  chronologically  anterior  to 
experience."  On  the  other  hand,  against  another  an- 
tagonist, he  maintains  that  principles,  though  not 
innate  in  the  intellect  as  actual  cognitions,  were  poten- 
tially innate.  "  For  he  shows  that  the  intellect  is  not 
dependent  upon  sense  and  experience,  except  acci- 
dentally, in  so  far  as  these  are  requisite  in  affording  a 
know-ledge  of  the  terms,  to  afford  the  occasio7i  on  which,  by 
its  native  and  proper  light,  it  actually  manifests  the 
principles  which  it  potentially  contained ;  and  that 
these  principles  are  certain,  even  were  those  phe- 
nomena of  sense  illusive,  in  reference  to  which  they 
are  elicited :" — which  is  the  same  as  to  say,  that  the  in- 


Y* 


154  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

tuitional  action  of  the  intellect  is  dependent  on  a  pre- 
viously acquired  knowledge  of  terms  to  give  occasion 
to  the  intuitive  perceptions  which  are  elicited.  It  does 
not  follow  that  the  intuitive  axioms  or  truths  which 
are  rendered  perceptible  by  the  light  which  the  know- 
ledge of  terms  affords  to  the  intellect,  were  innate  or 
preexisted  in  the  intellect,  any  more  than  that  the 
proportions  of  quantities  or  numbers,  exist  in  the 
mind  prior  to  their  being  perceived,  instead  of  exist- 
ing in  the  nature  and  relations  of  the  things  which  are 
signified  by  the  terms  of  which  a  knowledge  has  been 
acquired  by  instruction.  The  principles  which  are 
perceived  by  intuition  are  not  actual  cognitions  prior  to 
their  being  intuitively  perceived.  To  say  that  the 
mind  potentially  contained  them,  so  as  actually  to  mani- 
fest them  under  the  condition  of  the  light  requisite  to 
the  perception  of  them,  is  only  to  say,  that  when  the 
intellect  has  the  requisite  light  concerning  the  terms, 
or  the  phenomena,  to  which  the  intuitive  principles 
have  reference,  they  are  spontaneously  perceived  and 
become  actually  manifest.  The  author  refers  to  other 
passages  of  the  same  writer,  "  where  it  is  frequently 
repeated  that  sense  and  experience  are  not  the  cause  or 
origin,  but  only  the  occasion  on  which  the  natural  light 
of  intellect  reveals  its  principles  or  first  truths.  .  .  . 
Scotus  professedly  lays  down  as  the  very  foundation  of 
his  doctrine — that  reflection  finds  in  the  mind,  or  intel- 
lect itself,  principles  or  necessary  cognitions,  which  are 
not  the  educts  of  experience,  howbeit  not  actually 
manifested  prior  to,  or  except  on  occasion  of,  some  em- 
pirical act  of  knowledge."  (P.  102.) 

These  and  many  other  testimonies  in  harmony  with 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCKIPTURES.  155 

• 

our  experience,  are  to  the  point : — that  all  intuitions, 
intuitive  perceptions,  are  occasioned  by  prior  intel- 
lectual knowledge  and  cogitative  action,  concerning 
that  to  which  the  intuitions  have  reference.  To  sup- 
pose, therefore,  that  the  truths  of  revelation  were  per- 
ceived, revealed,  manifested  by  intuition,  would  be  to 
suppose  that  the  prophets  had  acquired,  by  prior 
instruction,  a  knowledge  of  such  related  truths  as 
would  afford  to  the  intellect  sufficient  light  to  make 
the  otherwise  undiscoverable  truths  immediately,  spon- 
taneously, and  necessarily  manifest.  To  suppose  this 
possible  in  the  case  of  the  sacred  writers,  is  to  suppose 
it  possible  to  all  other  men ;  for  the  power  of  intuition 
is  universal  and  common  to  all  men  ;  and,  by  the  sup- 
position, theological  truths,  if  intuitive,  must,  as  abso- 
lutely and  in  the  same  sense  as  any  others  that  are  in- 
tuitive, be  necessary  truths,  and  be  originally  discover- 
able by  one  as  easily  as  by  any  other  man.  This 
might,  perhaps,  suit  those  who  imagine  that  all  the 
theological  and  religious  truths  which  are  known  or 
which  it  is  necessary  to  know,  were  discovered  by  the 
prophets,  and  are  discoverable  to  all  by  intuition,  but 
for  the  circumstance  that  there  could  not  on  that  sup- 
position be  any  diversity  in  such  truths,  since  all  intui- 
tive truths  are  original,  universal,  and  necessary,  and 
therefore  must  be  the  same  to  all  minds.  Were 
religious  truths,  doctrines,  creeds,  the  product  of  in- 
tuition, therefore,  they  could  not  be  diverse,  incon- 
sistent, contradictory,  but  must  necessarily  be  uniform, 
identical,  and,  moreover,  they  could  not  be  held  specu- 
latively  and  dubiously ;  but  must  be  consciously  and 
implicitly  believed.  For  it  is  impossible  intuitively  to 


156  THE  PLENAEY  INSPIRATION 

perceive  a  truth  without  believing  it,  beyond  all  doubt 
and  question,  to  be  a  truth.  The  perception  of  a  truth 
by  intuition  is  inseparable  from  a  consciousness,  a  con- 
scious feeling  and  belief  that  it  is  truth.  To  imagine 
spiritual  intuitions  or  inspired  intuitions,  which  are 
inconsistent  with  each  other,  is  therefore  absurd. 
And  the  facts — that  the  power  of  intuition  is  not 
receptive,  but  only  perceptive  ;  that  what  is  perceived  by 
intuition  is,  in  respect  to  the  same  things,  invariably 
and  necessarily  the  same,  because  the  natures  and  rela- 
tions of  the  things  to  which  intuitions  have  reference, 
are  ever  the  same ;  that  intuitive  perceptions  are  im- 
mediate, spontaneous,  involuntary,  and  unavoidable 
under  the  conditions  which  are  requisite  to  occasion 
them ;  and  that  the  truths  perceived  by  intuition  are 
realized  to  the  consciousness  only  as  they  are  intel- 
lectually cognized  or  apprehended  in  words, — these 
facts  are  conclusive  against  the  supposition  of  truths 
being,  through  the  faculty  or  power  of  intuition, 
revealed,  imparted,  conveyed  to  the  mind  by  any  external 
agent  or  influence ;  and  equally  conclusive  against  any 
spiritual  or  extraordinary  exercise  of  the  power  of  in- 
tuition as  enabling  some  minds  to  discover  what  every 
other  mind  is  not  equally  capacitated  to  discover. 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  157 


CHAPTER    VII. 


REVIEW      OF     LEE     ON     INSPIRATION.* 


I.  Introductory  Statements  and  Observations. 

As  preliminary  to  a  particular  examination  of  this 
work,  it  may  be  of  use  to  state  briefly  the  different 
theories  of  Inspiration  as  now  held  by  different  schools 
of  theologians  and  philosophers  ;  which  may  be  classi- 
fied as  follows : 

1.  The  Pantheistic  ;   which  treats  of  inspiration  as 
common  to  all  men,  and  as  of  the  same   nature  as 
sensations  and  impulses,  011  the  assumption  that  the 
Divine  Being  is  the  sole  actuating  power  alike  in  the 
phenomena  of  spiritual  and  of  material  existences. 

2.  The  Rationalistic ;  which  denies  the  supernatural 
origin  of  the  Scriptures,  and  ascribes  them  to  that  ele- 
vation and  excitement  of  intellect,  imagination,  and 
genius,  which  in  poets,  sages,  historians,  and  philoso- 
phers, is  popularly  called  inspiration. 

3.  The  Idealistic  ;  which,  assuming  the  non-existence 
of  any  thing  external  to  the  mind,  regards  revelations 

*  "  The  Inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture,  its  Nature  and  Proof:  Eight 
Discourses.  Preached  before  the  University  of  Dublin,  by  William  Lee, 
M.A.,  Fellow  and  Tutor  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin.  London,  1854. 
Pp.  539. 


158  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

merely  as  mental  intuitions,  and  inspiration  as  the 
power  of  apprehending  intuitive  revelations,  "in  their 
perfect  fullness  and  integrity,"  by  an  elevation  of  the  re- 
ligious consciousness,  and  spiritual  vision  ;  not  as  con- 
veying thoughts  or  truths  from  without,  but  as  an  ex- 
ercise and  product  of  faculties  and  powers  already  pos- 
sessed, "the  process  being  in  no  sense  mechanical,  but 
purely  dynamical" 

4.  The  theory  of  illuminating  influences,  the  same 
in  kind  as  the  enlightening  and  sanctifying  influences 
of  the  Spirit  which  are  common  to  all  holy  men  in 
every  age  of  the  Church. 

5.  The  theory  of  different  degrees  of  supernatural 
influences,  exerted  on  the  faculties  of  the  sacred  writers 
as  by  superintendence,  elevation,  suggestion,  etc. 

6.  The  Dynamical  theory,  which   contemplates  in 
spiration  as  the  result  of  a  combination  and  coaction  of 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  with  the  agency  of  man, 
in  which  the  Spirit  cooperates  with  man's  faculties  ac- 
cording to  their  natural  laws. 

7.  The  theory  of  infallible  guidance,  which  differs 
from  that  termed   "  mechanical" — by  substituting  in- 
fallible guidance,  for  direct  dictation. 

8.  The  Mechanical ;  which  ascribes  both  the  thoughts 
and  words  of  Scripture  to  the  immediate  agency  of 
God,  and  contemplates  man  only  as  the  instrument 
through    which    they    are    uttered,    vocally  and    in 
writing. 

With  the  exception  of  the  last,  no  one  of  these 
theories  treats  of  Inspiration  as  a  divine  act  by  which 
thoughts  were  verbally  conveyed  to  the  sacred  writers 
to  be  uttered  by  them  vocally  or  in  writing ;  nor  do 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  159 

any  of  them  satisfactorily  exhibit  the  ground  of  infal- 
libility in  what  the  prophets  and  apostles  officially 
spoke  and  wrote.  The  best  of  them  treat  of  the  in- 
spiring influence  only  as  an  influence  exerted  on  the 
intellectual  or  other  faculties  of  men.  As  theories, 
they  are  not  consistent  with  the  plenary  inspiration  of 
all  and  every  part  of  "  Scripture."  They  regard  the 
language  as  of  man's  selection,  and,  with  respect  to  the 
matter,  they  differ  widely  as  to  the  extent  of  what  they 
call  inspiration.  With  the  exception  of  the  seventh, 
they  variously  impute  the  knowledge  of  the  sacred 
penmen  as  exhibited  in  what  they  wrote,  to  the  ordi- 
nary exercise  of  their  natural  faculties,  to  intellectual 
and  spiritual  intuition,  to  an  elevation  of  religious 
consciousness,  to  inward  illumination,  suggestion, 
direction,  superintendence,  and  other  diverse  species 
and  degrees  of  influence.  Those  who  hold  the  theory 
of  infallible  guidance,  however,  practically  believe,  as 
firmly  as  those  who  adopt  the  language  of  the 
"mechanical"  theory,  that  the  original  words  of  Scrip- 
ture are  the  words  of  God.  They,  nevertheless,  be- 
lieve in  an  essential  difference  between  revelation  and 
inspiration. 

The  mechanical  theory  teaches  that  the  words  of 
Scripture,  as  they  were  originally  written,  were  sup- 
plied by  immediate  dictation,  or  in  a  manner  equiva- 
lent to  that,  and  therefore  that  they  were  literally  the 
words  of  God,  and  infallible.  The  theory  of  infallible 
guidance,  without  expressly  indicating  the  mode  in 
which  the  language  was  supplied,  except  as  the  Avriters 
were  guided  in  selecting  it,  imports,  that  the  prophets 
and  apostles  were  guided  both  in  thought  and  language 


160  THE  PLENAKY  INSPIRATION 

by  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  as  to  be  in  such  a  sense  His 
organs,  that  what  they  said,  He  said. 

Now  the  Scriptures  themselves  expressly  claim  to  be 
the  infallible  word  of  God,  given,  imparted,  communi- 
cated, by  His  inspiration,  —  His  act  inspiring  the 
thoughts  and  words,  which  are  represented  by  the 
writing,  into  the  minds  of  the  prophets  and  apostles, 
to  be  by  them  committed  to  writing.  As  such,  they 
claim  to  be  of  infallible  Divine  authority,  and  the  only 
rule  of  faith  and  practice ;  and  as  such,  they  have  ever 
been  regarded  by  the  Church  of  God, — all  those  in 
every  age  whom  they  characterize  as  holy  and  faithful. 

What  then  is  required  in  a  Scriptural  definition  of 
Inspiration  ? 

1st.  That  it  should  exhibit  that  inspiration  which  is 
affirmed  of  the  sacred  writings,  as  simply  a  Divine  act, 
inspiring,  conveying,  into  the  minds  of  the  prophets 
what  they  were  to  represent  by  written  characters. 
According  to  the  proper  usage  and  signification  of  the 
term,  Inspiration  is  as  purely  a  Divine  act,  as  inhal- 
ing air  into  the  lungs  is  a  human  act.  It  is  an  in- 
breathing, an  impulsion,  from  without,  of  intelligence, 
thoughts,  truths,  into  the  minds  of  men  who  are  as  in- 
voluntary in  receiving  it,  as  they  are  in  hearing  sounds 
from  a  foreign  and  invisible  source,  and  as  voluntary  in 
speaking  and  writing  what  they  so  received,  as  in 
uttering  the  thoughts  conveyed  to  them  vocally  by 
their  fellow-men. 

2d.  A  Scriptural  definition  should  contemplate  the 
thoughts  conveyed,  as  Divine  and  infallible,  on  the 
ground  that  they  were  conveyed  to  the  writers  by  the 
Divine  act  of  inspiration ;  and  should  so  contemplate 


OF    THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  161 

the  words  no  less  than  the  thoughts,  since  words  are 
the  vehicle  of  thoughts,  without  which  thoughts  can 
not  be  transferred  from  one  mind  to  another,  nor  be 
conceived  or  realized  to  the  intelligent  consciousness. 

3d.  Such  a  definition  should  wholly  preclude  the  sup- 
position of  any  element  or  effect  of  human  agency  in  the 
thoughts  or  words,  which  were  inspired  into  the  minds 
of  the  prophets  and  apostles  to  be  uttered  by  them  vo- 
cally or  by  written  characters ;  for  being  communicat- 
ed to  them  from  God  by  inspiration,  they  are  exclu- 
sively His  thoughts  and  words,  and  as  such,  can,  in  no 
sense  or  degree,  be  man's,  or  a  result  of  man's  agency, 
any  more  than  the  act  of  one  man  in  thinking  and  con- 
veying his  thoughts  to  another  by  vocal  utterance,  can, 
in  any  sense  or  degree,  be  the  act  of  another  man  who, 
whether  voluntarily  or  otherwise,  hears  what  is  so 
uttered. 

The  whole  question  is  founded  on  a  few  simple  con- 
siderations. 1.  It  was  necessary  to  man  that  the 
thoughts  of  God  should  be  inspired  into  his  mind,  be- 
cause he  could  not  of  himself  discover  them,  and  yet 
the  knowledge  of  them  was  indispensable  to  him.  2d. 
It  was  necessary  that  they  should  be  inspired  in  words, 
because  he  could  not  otherwise  apprehend,  conceive, 
be  conscious  of,  and  intelligently  and  infallibly  express 
them  in  writing.  3d.  It  was  necessary  that  he  should 
write  them,  because  they  behooved  to  be  made  known 
to  others  as  the  infallible  words  of  God,  and  the  only 
rule  of  human  faith  and  practice.  4th.  It  was  neces- 
sary that  they  should  be  inspired  and  written  in  the 
language,  style,  and  diction  of  the  recipient,  that  he 
and  his  readers  might,  in  their  own  accustomed  and 


162  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

familiar  words  and  idioms  understand  correctly  what 
had  been  conveyed  by  inspiration ;  and  because  no 
other  than  the  inspired  words  could  perfectly  and  in- 
fallibly express  and  convey  the  inspired  thoughts.  5th. 
Inspiration  being,  not  a  Divine  influence  exerted  on 
the  faculties  of  man,  but  an  act  of  God  conveying  the 
thoughts  which  He  alone  selected,  determined  on,  and 
inspired  into  the  minds  of  men  appointed  by  Him  to 
receive,  and  to  utter  them  in  writing,  there  was  the 
same  necessity  for  His  inspiring  agency  in  respect  to 
every  portion  as  to  any  portion  of  what  was  written 
officially  by  them. 

With  respect  to  all  those  theories  which  represent 
inspiration  as  a  Divine  influence  on  the  "understandings, 
imaginations,  memories,  and  other  mental  powers  of  the 
writers  of  the  sacred  books,"  it  may,  we  apprehend,  be 
justly  said,  that  they  wholly  fail  to  show  either  how 
those  writers  became  possessed  of  the  thoughts  which 
they  expressed,  or  how  the  words  which  they  employed 
became  the  words  of  God.  Many,  nay,  all  the  most 
important  of  those  thoughts  were,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  undiscoverable  by  the  human  mind,  however 
acted  on  by  a  superior  influence  ;  unless  it  be  pretend- 
ed that  inspiration  made  man's  mind  as  omniscient,  all- 
knowing,  infinite,  as  that  of  the  Creator.  But  one  of 
those  writers  expressly  tells  us  that :  "  Eye  hath  not 
seen,  nor  ear  heard,  neither  have  entered  into  the 
heart  of  man,  the  things  which  God  hath  prepared  for 
them  that  love  Him.  But  God  hath  revealed  them  unto 
us  by  His  Spirit :  for  the  Spirit  searcheth  all  things, 
yea  the  deep  things  of  God.  For  what  man  knoweth 
the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  man  which  is 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  163 

in  him  ?  Even  so  the  things  of  God  knoweth  no  man, 
but  the  Spirit  of  God."  That  is,  "  as  no  one  knows 
the  thoughts  of  a  man  but  the  man  himself,  so  no  one 
knows  the  thoughts  of  God,  but  God  Himself." 
(Hodge,  1  Cor.  2d) 

No  degree  or  kind  of  influence  then,  ever  was,  or 
possibly  could  be,  exerted  on  man's  mind,  enabling 
him  to  discover  or  know  the  thoughts,  acts,  or  pur- 
poses of  God,  till  He  revealed  them  by  His  Spirit. 
But  the  act  of  revealing  them,  was  not  an  influence  on 
the  faculties  of  the  sacred  writers,  but  an  act  which 
imparted,  conveyed,  transferred  to  them,  those  other- 
wise inscrutable  and  unattainable  thoughts  of  God. 
If  inspiration  was  an  influence  on  the  faculties  of  man, 
then  the  Spirit  did  not  by  His  inspiring  influence  re- 
veal the  deep  things  of  God.  They  must  have  been 
made  known  to  the  sacred  writers  by  some  other 
Divine  act  or  influence.  The  province  of  inspiration 
must  have  been  limited  to  what  the  prophets  and 
apostles  already  knew,  and  what,  under  that  influence, 
they  were  capable  of  discovering.  There  is  nothing  in 
these  theories  of  inspiration  to  show  how  they  became 
possessed  of  those  Divine  thoughts  which  were  unclis- 
coverable  by  their  finite  faculties.  If  it  be  said  that, 
in  part,  those  thoughts  were  revealed  by  vocal  utter- 
ances, that  can  not  be  affirmed  of  all  of  them.  How 
did  they  become  possessed  of  the  remainder  ? 

And  why  should  a  special,  supernatural,  inspiring 
influence  on  the  mental  faculties  of  the  sacred  writers 
be  necessary  to  enable  them  to  apprehend,  understand, 
or  remember,  thoughts  already  known  to  them,  any 
more  than  such  an  influence  was,  and  still  is,  necessary 


164  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

to  enable  those  who  read  what  they  wrote,  to  under- 
stand and  remember  the  thoughts  made  known  by  their 
writings  ?  If  any  influence  of  the  Spirit  is  necessary 
in  the  latter  case,  is  it  an  inspiring  influence  ?  and  is 
there  then  no  difference  between  inspiration  and  sanc- 
tification?  Could  not  Moses  and  the  prophets  and 
apostles,  without  any  Divine  inspiration,  speak  and 
write  what  they  already  knew  ?  Were  they  not  as  com- 
petent to  write  what  they  understood  and  had  occasion 
to  communicate,  as  Sennacherib  was  to  write  his  letter 
to  Hezekiah,  or  as  Claudius  Lysias  was  to  write  his 
letter  to  Felix  ? 

But  it  is  alleged,  that,  supposing  the  prophets  to 
have  written  only  what  was  known  to  them  by  revela- 
tion or  otherwise,  prior  to  their  inspiration,  the  inspir- 
ing influence  exerted  on  their  faculties  guided  them,  in- 
fallibly, as  to  the  thoughts  they  were  to  express,  so 
that  out  of  all  the  thoughts  known  to  them  before,  they 
were  restrained  from  expressing  any  others  than  those 
which  they  actually  expressed  in  their  writings,  and, 
in  regard  to  those,  were  effectually  preserved  from 
error.  This  is  alleged  by  many  writers  as  the  sole  or 
the  principal  effect  of  Inspiration ;  and  if  inspiration 
was  an  influence  on  the  intellectual  faculties  of  the 
writers,  it  may  be  deemed  a  necessary  inference  from 
that  doctrine.  But  how  could  such  guidance  make 
that  which  the  prophets  wrote  the  infallible  word  of 
God  ?  If  in  writing  they  expressed  certain  of  their 
own  thoughts  which  were  familiarly  known  to  them 
before,  and  were  so  guided  by  inspiration  as  to  express 
those  thoughts  accurately,  and  to  avoid  expressing 
other  thoughts  known  to  them,  how  did  those  of  their 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  165 

thoughts  which  they  actually  expressed  become.  Di- 
vine ?  How  did  they  become  the  authoritative  and  in- 
fallible thoughts  of  God  ?  A  guidance  in  the  selection 
of  some  thoughts  in  preference  to  others,  could  not  in- 
vest the  selected  thoughts  with  any  new  quality  or 
attribute.  Nor  is  it  possible  that  a  mere  guidance  of 
man  in  the  exercise  of  his  natural  faculties,  should 
enable  him  to  discover  the  '  deep  things  of  God ' — things 
wholly  beyond  the  scope  of  his  faculties,  till  revealed 
by  the  Spirit  ? 

Moreover,  if  it  was  the  end  of  inspiration  to  guide 
the  writers  infallibly,  in  their  selection  of  the  thoughts 
to  be  expressed  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  it  was  no  less 
necessary  that  the  same  influence  on  their  faculties 
should  infallibly  guide  them  in  the  choice  of  words  by 
which  infallibly  to  express  the  selected  thoughts.  If 
the  Scriptures  are  the  infallible  word  of  God,  then 
there  must  be  as  much  infallibility  in  the  selection  of  the 
words  as  in  the  selection  of  the  thoughts,  contained  in 
them.  The  words  convey  the  thoughts.  All  that  we 
know  of  the  thoughts  is  expressed  by  the  words.  But 
is  it  possible  to  conceive  of  an  influence  on  the  faculties 
of  the  human  mind,  which,  without  suspending  the 
free  exercise  of  those  faculties,  should  determine  it  to 
adopt  certain  particular  words  whereby  to  express  its 
thoughts  ?  Must  not  such  an  influence  amount  to  ex- 
press dictation  ?  Must  it  not  supersede  the  voluntary 
and  intelligent  action  of  the  mind  itself?  And  does 
not  the  supposition  of  such  an  influence  determining 
the  selection,  both  of  words  and  thoughts,  preclude 
all  interference  of  human  agency  in  the  selection  ? 

It  may  be  satisfactory  to  one  who  firmly  believes 


166  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

that  the  Scriptures  are  the  infallible  word  of  God,  to 
say,  '  that  inspiration  is  essentially  different  from  reve- 
lation— that  the  object  of  revelation  is  to  impart  know- 
ledge to  its  recipients — and  that  the  end  and  object  of 
inspiration  is  to  render  men  infallible  in  communicat- 
ing truth  to  others — that  we  know  nothing  of  the  na- 
ture of  inspiration,  that  is,  of  the  mode  of  the  Spirit's 
operation ;  but  only  know  its  effect ;  and  that  the 
effect  of  inspiration  was  to  render  its  subject  the  infalli- 
ble organ  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  communicating  truth, 
in  such  sense  as  that  what  was  said  or  written  by  an 
inspired  man,  the  Holy  Ghost  said  or  wrote.'  But  how 
can  such  statements  relieve  the  subject,  or  serve  to  ex- 
plain the  difficulties  which  are  so  generally  deemed  to 
require  explanation  ?  How  can  they  settle  the  points, 
whether  the  inspiring  influence  was  exerted  on  the 
faculties  of  the  sacred  writers,  or  was  exerted  in  breath- 
ing, imparting,  conveying  to  their  minds  that  which 
they  were  to  write  ?  or  whether  it  was  the  '  organ ' 
that  was  rendered  infallible,  or  the  truths  conveyed 
through  the  '  organ '  ?  If  man  was  the  organ,  was 
he  rendered  infallible  as  a  voluntary  agent,  or  as  an 
involuntary  subject  ?  If  as  a  voluntary  agent,  what 
should  hinder  his  being  infallible  in  every  thing  else 
as  well  in  his  writing  ?  If  as  an  involuntary  subject, 
how  could  the  effect  of  inspiration  be  any  other  than 
that  of  conveying  the  Divine  thoughts  to  his  mind  to 
be  uttered  like  all  other  thoughts  by  his  voluntary  acts 
in  speaking  and  writing  ?  If  the  inspiring  influence 
was  exerted  on  his  intellectual  faculties,  then  is  it  not 
assuming  to  know  something  of  the  nature  of  inspira- 
tion to  say  that  it  is  essentially  different  from  revela- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCEIPTURES.  167 

tion — essentially  different  from  imparting  knowledge 
to  its  recipients  ?  Is  it  not  assuming  to  know  some- 
thing of  the  mode  of  the  Spirit's  operation,  to  say  that 
the  end  and  object  of  His  operation  on  the  faculties  of 
men  by  inspiration,  is  to  render  them  infallible  in  com- 
municating truth  to  others  ?  Does  any  man  know  so 
certainly,  that  this  was  the  end  and  object  of  inspira- 
tion, as  to  justify  him  in  asserting  that  inspiration  is 
shown  and  demonstrated  by  its  effect,  to  be  essentially 
different  from  that  Divine  operation,  the  effect  of  which 
is  revelation  ?  Can  any  man  say  that  revelation  is  the 
effect  of  one  mode  of  Divine  operation,  and  that  the 
effect  of  another  and  essentially  different  mode  of  Di- 
vine operation  is  that  of  rendering  man  infallible  in 
communicating  truth  to  others  ? — without  assuming  to 
know  something  of  the  nature  and  mode  of  operation 
in  the  respective  cases.  Can  any  man  safely  say  that 
inspiration  was  a  Divine  operation  on  the  faculties  of 
man,  and  that  its  effect  was  not  to  communicate  truth 
to  him,  but  to  render  him  an  infallible  organ  of  the 
Spirit  in  communicating  truth  to  others — an  organ  in 
such  a  sense  that  what  he  said  or  wrote,  the  Spirit  said 
or  wrote — unless  he  certainly  and  infallibly  knows 
something  of  the  nature  and  mode  of  such  Divine 
operation  ?  Must  he  not  know  that  the  operation  was 
of  such  a  nature  as  not  to  impart  knowledge,  but  only 
to  render  man  as  the  subject  of  it,  an  infallible  organ 
in  communicating  knowledge  to  his  fellow-men  ?  Can 
any  two  things  be  more  palpably  different,  or  imply 
more  widely  different  operations  ;  and  does  not  a  posi- 
tive and  exclusive  ascription  of  one  specific  effect  to 
one  of  these  operations,  and  of  an  essentially  different 


168  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

effect  to  the  other,  imply  some  knowledge  or  theory 
of  the  nature  and  mode  of  those  operations  ? 

But  what  is  meant  by  man  being  rendered  by  In- 
spiration '  the  infallible  organ  of  the  Spirit  in  commu- 
nicating truth,  in  such  sense  as  that  what  was  said  and 
written  by  an  inspired  man,  the  Spirit  said  or  wrote '  ? 

1.  By  an  inspired  man,  undoubtedly  is  meant  a  man 
on  whose  understanding,  imagination,  memory,  and 
other  mental  powers,  the  inspiring  influence  was  ex- 
erted. 2.  By  his  being  rendered  by  that  influence,  the 
organ  of  the  Spirit  in  communicating  truth,  must,  as 
we  apprehend,  be  meant,  that  he  was  rendered  the  pas- 
sive organ,  instrument,  machine,  of  the  Spirit.  For  he 
was  the  Spirit's  organ  in  communicating  truth.  It 
was  the  Spirit  who  communicated  the  truth  through 
man  as  His  organ ;  as  certain  intelligible  sounds  are 
communicated  through  a  trumpet,  or  through  the  pipes 
of  an  organ.  3.  It  therefore,  can  not,  with  any  more 
truth  or  propriety,  be  affirmed  in  the  same  sense  of  the 
organ  and  of  the  Spirit,  that  what  the  organ  said  the 
Spirit  said ;  than  it  can  be  affirmed  of  a  material  organ, 
and  of  the  musical  performer  on  it,  that  the  particular 
notes  of  a  tune  were  evoked  by  the  instrument,  in  the 
same  sense  that  they  were  evoked  by  the  agency  of  the 
performer.  The  instrument  indeed  was  necessary  to 
the  effect ;  still  it  was  but  a  passive  instrument,  vehi- 
cle, medium,  of  that  which  was  communicated  to  and 
through  it.  The  prophets  and  apostles  spoke  and 
wrote  in  their  official  capacity,  not  of  their  own  motion, 
not  on  their  own  authority,  any  more  than  an  instru- 
ment sounds  the  notes  of  a  tune  of  itself  and  independ- 
antly  of  the  performer's  agency.  When  it  is  said  that 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  169 

they  spoke,  it  is  not  meant  that  they  spoke  or  commu- 
nicated truth,  in  the  same  sense  that  the  Spirit  spoke 
to  and  through  them,  any  more  than  when  it  is  said 
that  echo  speaks,  it  is  meant  that  the  reverberations  of 
the  air  utter  articulate  sounds  in  the  same  sense  as  the 
voice  of  a  human  agent.  An  organ,  and  the  performer 
on  it,  are  of  distinct  and  diverse  natures.  They  can 
not  be  confounded  or  resolved  into  each  other.  The 
one  is  active,  the  other  passive — acted  on.  The  act  of 
one  can  not  be  made  identical  with  that  of  the  other. 
The  effect  produced  on  the  one  as  an  instrument,  can 
not  be  the  same  thing  with  the  efficient  cause  of  that 
effect. 

On  the  contrary,  if  Inspiration  was  a  Divine  act  or 
influence,  exerted,  not  on  the  intellectual  faculties  of 
the  sacred  writers,  but  exerted  in  conveying  thoughts 
to  their  minds,  and  conveying  them  in  words,  whether 
original  revelations,  or  thoughts  previously  known — all 
the  thoughts  and  words  in  their  due  order  and  succes- 
sion which  they  were,  officially,  to  speak  or  write — then 
there  is,  as  we  apprehend,  no  confusion,  combination, 
or  identification  of  Divine  and  human  agencies  in  the 
process.  The  acts  of  the  respective  agents  are  distinct, 
and  those  of  each,  are  appropriate  to  his  nature,  ca- 
pacity, and  office.  And  the  effect  of  Inspiration  in  that 
case,  was  not  that  of  rendering  man  the  infallible  organ 
of  the  Spirit  in  communicating  truth.  That  was  not 
necessary.  All  occasion  for  it  was  superseded  by  the 
mental  constitution  which  the  Creator  had  given  to 
man — that  law  of  his  mind  by  which  he  thinks  in 
words,  and  receives  the  thoughts  of  others  only  in  their 
words.  He  could  not  but  infallibly  receive  and  be 

8 


170  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

conscious  of  receiving  the  thoughts  and  words  which 
were  conveyed  into  his  mind  by  Divine  inspiration ; 
and  having  received  them,  he  could  infallibly  speak 
and  write  them  as  he  was  appointed  and  moved,  con- 
strained, necessitated  to  do,  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  But 
the  effect  of  Inspiration  was,  the  reception  and  intelli- 
gent consciousness  by  the  sacred  penmen,  of  the 
thoughts  in  the  words  which  they  were  to  speak  and 
write.  The  thoughts  and  words  were  breathed,  in- 
spired, conveyed,  into  their  minds  by  the  Spirit,  to  be 
by  them  reiittered — spoken,  or  written — as  they  re- 
ceived them.  Accordingly,  they  '  spake  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.'  '  God  at  sundry  times, 
and  in  divers  manners ' — by  His  audible  voice,  by  intel- 
ligible signs,  silently  in  dreams  and  visions — spake  to 
the  Fathers,  by  the  prophets.  He  spake  by  the  pro- 
phets, as  really  as,  at  a  later  period,  He  spake  by  His 
Son.  He  inspired,  conveyed  by  His  act,  His  thoughts 
and  words  into  the  minds  of  the  prophets  to  be  by  the 
natural  use  of  their  faculties,  uttered,  reechoed,  vocally 
articulated,  written,  as  His  thoughts  and  words. 

It  is  indubitable,  if  the  Scriptures  are  in  any  proper 
sense  the  word  of  God,  and  the  infallible  and  only  rule 
of  faith  and  life,  that  He  must  have  determined  in  every 
particular  each  thought  and  expression  that  should  be 
written  as  His.  No  influence  on  man's  faculties,  no 
guidance  of  man  in  the  exercise  of  his  faculties,  could 
possibly  have  had  any  thing  to  do  in  determining 
what  should  be  recorded  as  the  thoughts  in  the  infalli- 
ble words  of  God.  Both  thoughts  and  words  must 
have  been  prescribed  by  Him,  if  they  are  His  thoughts 
and  words,  and  involve  His  immutable  authority,  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  171 

constitute  the  rule  by  which  the  faith  and  life  of  His 

t/ 

rational  creatures  are  to  be  judged.  How  then  did  He 
prescribe  them?  We  answer,  that  according  to  the 
Scriptures  themselves,  He  prescribed  them  by  His  act 
of  inspiration — by  inspiring  both  the  thoughts  and 
words  into  the  minds  of  those  whom  He  employed  to 
write  them.  He  gave  the  Scriptures — that  which  is 
written,  and  constitutes  the  Holy  Scriptures  by  His 
inspiration  of  them.  All  Scripture,  that  which  is 
written,  is  given,  conferred,  imparted,  by  inspiration  of 
God. 

The  Scriptures  indicate  but  one  kind  of  inspiration 

-that   of   inbreathing — imparting,    conveying,    what 
was  to  be  spoken  and  written.     It  left  to  the  speaker 
and  writer  no  option,  no  discretion,  no  premeditation, 
as  to  the  thoughts  he  should  utter,  or  as  to  the  words 
he  should  speak  or  write.     It  were  absurd  to  suppose 
that  the  sacred  penmen  were  any  more  at  liberty  to 
premeditate,    select,  or   determine,  what   they  should 
write  for  the  guidance  of  all  coming  generations  of 
men,  than  the  Apostles  were  at  liberty  when  arraigned 
before  kings  and  magistrates,  to  premeditate,  choose, 
and  determine,  what  they  should  say  in  defense  of 
themselves.     They  were  expressly  forbidden  to  take 
any  thought  beforehand,  what  they  should  say ;  and 
were  required  to  utter  that  which  was  given,  inspired 
into  their  minds  at  the  time,  by  the  Holy  Ghost.     It 
was  not  they  that  spake — not  their  thoughts  or  words 
which  they  uttered — it  was  the  Holy  Ghost  that  spake 
• — it  was  His  thoughts  in  His  words  that  were  uttered. 

In  this  view  the  subject  is  freed  from  all  embarrass- 
ing perplexity.     That  which  is  inspired,  conveyed  by 


172  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

the  act  of  inspiration  is  the  word  of  God.  The  thoughts 
are  His  as  being  conveyed  from  Him.  The  words  are 
His  as  being  the  words  in  which  He  conveyed  the 
thoughts.  There  could  be  no  human  element  or 
quality  in  the  thoughts  or  in  the  words  as  their  vehicle, 
any  more  than  in  the  mind  from  which  they  were  con- 
veyed, or  in  the  act  by  which  they  were  inspired. 
There  could  be  no  intermixture  or  interference  of  hu- 
man agency  in  the  selection  or  the  transmission  of  the 
thoughts  or  words,  for  the  recipient  could  anticipate 
neither,  and  was  involuntary  in  the  reception  of  both  ; 
and  though  his  agency  was  intelligently,  freely,  and 
responsibly,  exerted  in  writing  what  was  divinely 
inspired  into  his  mind,  he  could  have  had  no  know- 
ledge, volition,  consciousness,  or  responsibility,  in 
respect  to  what  he  was  to  write  prior  to  his  involun- 
tary reception  of  it  by  inspiration.  And  if  the  Creator 
has  ever  communicated  His  will  intelligibly  to  man  in 
any  way,  if  He  has  spoken  to  man  in  an  audible  voice, 
and  in  speaking  has  used  the  same  articulations  as  the 
vehicle  of  His  thoughts,  which  man  uses  in  speaking 
to  his  fellows,  there  can  be  nothing  any  more  incredible 
or  mysterious  in  His  acts  of  inspiration,  than  in  His 
acts  of  vocal  utterance. 

Now  a  discussion  of  the  subject  of  inspiration  must 
be  a  discussion  intended  either  to  show  that  the  sacred 
writers  were  themselves  inspired,  or  to  show  that  what 
they  wrote  was  given  by  inspiration.  It  must  there- 
fore relate  to  the  nature  or  mode  of  inspiration.  At 
present,  the  fact  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  result  of 
some  kind  and  degree  of  inspiration,  is  generally  ad- 
mitted. The  diverse  theories  and  opinions  concerning 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  173 

it,  relate  to  its  nature  or  mode,  and  involve  a  variety 
of  questions.  Was  it  a  supernatural  operation  or  influ- 
ence ?  Was  it  exerted  on  the  faculties  of  the  prophets 
and  apostles,  stimulating,  elevating,  and  guiding 
them  ?  Or  was  it  a  Divine  act  by  which  the  thoughts 
expressed  were  conveyed  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred 
writers  ?  Were  the  thoughts  conveyed  in  the  words 
which  were  recorded,  or  were  they  conveyed  without 
the  words?  If  the  latter,  were  the  writers  infallibly 
guided  in  their  choice  of  words,  and  was  such  guidance 
of  the  nature  of  inspiration?  Would  an  infallible 
guidance  of  man  in  his  choice  of  words,  make  the 
words  which  he  selected  the  words  of  God  ?  Are  the 
Scriptures  affirmed  to  be  the  infallible  words  of  God, 
solely  on  the  ground  of  His  agency  in  their  inspiration? 
If  so,  can  the  words  any  more  than  the  thoughts,  be 
ascribed  in  any  respect  to  the  volition  of  man  ?  Can 
thoughts  be  conveyed  from  without  to  the  human 
mind  consistently  with  its  laws,  without  the  words  in 
which  they  are  conceived  and  expressed  ?  Are  we  not 
so  constituted  that  we  can  think,  receive  from  others,  be 
conscious  of,  remember,  and  express  thoughts,  only  in 
words,  and  signs  equivalent  to  articulate  sounds  ? 

Supposing  the  fact  to  be  admitted  that  the  Holy 
Scriptures  are  the  result  of  Divine  inspiration,  the 
question  which  behooves  first  to  be  considered  is, 
whether  the  Divine  agency  in  inspiration  was  exerted 
on  the  faculties  of  the  sacred  writers,  or  was  exerted  in 
conveying  to  their  minds  what  they  were  to  express 
in  writing  ?  This  at  once  involves  the  nature  of  in- 
spiration. These  two  modes  of  agency  have  nothing 
in  common.  Either  the  inspiring  agency  was  exerted 


174  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

in  exciting,  illuminating,  and  guiding  men  in  the  exer 
cise  of  their  mental  faculties,  or,  their  exercise  of  those 
faculties  continuing  as  before,  that  agency  was  exerted 
in  transferring  to  their  minds,  the  thoughts  of  the  Di- 
vine Mind.  Of  the  mode  in  which  the  Divine  Being 
acts,  or  exerts  His  efficiency  relatively  to  created 
minds,  we  know  nothing.  But  we  can  distinguish 
between  acts  of  creation  and  acts  towards  creatures 
after  they  exist ;  and,  with  equal  certainty,  between 
acts  of  regeneration,  and  acts  of  revelation  by  vocal  utter- 
ance of  words,  or  by  inspiration.  There  is  a  difference 
in  the  nature  of  the  effects  produced  by  these  different 
acts,  and  therefore  there  is  an  equal  difference  in  the 
nature  of  the  acts.  Each  class  of  acts  produces  its  own 
appropriate  effects,  and  not  the  effects  of  any  other 
class.  When  we  speak  of  the  nature  of  Divine  inspira 
tion,  we  mean  a  Divine  act  of  which  it  is  the  nature, 
not  to  change  the  heart,  not  to  sanctify,  not  to  elevate, 
or  excite  the  intellect,  the  affections,  or  the  will ;  but  - 
to  impart  intelligence,  convey  to  the  intelligent  con- 
sciousness particular  thoughts.  In  the  Scriptures 
themselves,  nothing  is  more  clearly  distinguished  than 
are  the  enlightening,  guiding,  sanctifying,  influences 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  from  His  agency  in  imparting  new 
thoughts,  infallible  truths,  revelations,  by  vocal  articu- 
lation, or  by  inspiring  them  into  the  minds  of  those 
appointed  to  receive  and  commit  them  to  writing.  It 
is  not  within  the  province  of  those  enlightening  and 
sanctifying  influences  to  reveal  new  truths,  or  to  im- 
part or  employ  any  Divine  truths  not  already  inspired 
and  recorded  in  the  Scriptures.  Those  influences  are, 
in  fact,  limited  to  the  use  and  instrumentality  of  those 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  175 

Scripture  truths  which  are  already  more  or  less  per- 
fectly known  to  the  subjects  of  them.  Hence  the 
necessity  of  publishing,  proclaiming,  preaching,  the 
Gospel,  in  order  to  the  conversion,  sanctification,  and 
salvation  of  men.  "  The  Spirit  of  God  maketh  the 

i 

reading,  but  especially  the  preaching  of  the  Word,  an 
effectual  mean  of  convincing  and  converting  sinners, 
and  of  building  them  up  in  holiness  and  comfort, 
through  faith  unto  salvation."  (Assem.  Catechism.} 
These  gracious  influences  are  common  to  all  true  be- 
lievers, and  have  in  them  nothing  of  the  nature  of 
inspiration.  The  Divine  acts  in  the  two  instances,  like 
the  effects  produced  by  them,  are  wholly  distinct  and 
different.  Yet  nothing  is  more  common,  in  treatises 
on  the  subject  of  inspiration,  than  to  confound  these 
two  distinct  agencies. 

Hence,  in  treating  of  that  subject,  it  is  necessary  to 
treat  of  the  nature  of  inspiration — inferring  its  peculiar 
nature  from  its  peculiar  effects.  And  in  considering 
its  effects  we  must  have  reference  to  the  object  to  be 
accomplished,  and  to  the  constitution,  capacity,  mode 
of  intellectual  action,  of  the  recipient.  If  according  to 
the  constitution,  laws,  mode  of  action,  of  his  mind, 
man  thinks  in  words,  and  receives  thoughts  from  other 
minds  only  in  words  or  signs  of  equivalent  significance, 
then  if  thoughts  are  conveyed  to  his  mind  by  inspira- 
tion they  must  be  conveyed  in  words ;  they  can  not 
consistently  with  the  natural  and  intelligent  exercise 
of  his  faculties,  be  conveyed  and  consciously  received, 
independently  of  the  words  which  are  required  to  ex- 
press them,  any  more  than  the  thoughts  of  one  man 
can  be  conveved  to  the  mind  of  another  without  words 

V 

as  their  vehicle. 


176  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

This  we  humbly  conceive  is  no  "metaphysical  theory 
as  to  the  laws  of  the  human  mind,  or  as  to  the  absolute 
necessity  of  words  to  the  exercise  of  thought ;"  but 
merely  a  question  as  to  a  fact  of  consciousness  :  and  as 
such  it  relates  only  to  adults  who  have  such  exercise 
of  all  their  faculties  as  to  be  capable  of  discerning  and 
deciding  on  the  facts  of  their  own  consciousness.  In- 
fants can  not  be  deemed  to  be  thus  capable ;  and  if 
they  have  thoughts  before  they  have  words,  does  it 
follow  that  they  have  thoughts  prior  to  their  having 
sensations,  and  perceiving,  by  sight,  hearing,  feeling,  or 
otherwise,  signs  no  less  significant  and  intelligible  than 
words?  Do  they  exhibit  any  evidence  of  thought, 
apart  from  their  perception  and  memory  of  such  signs? 
Is  not  the  entire  process  of  teaching  them  to  think, 
discriminate,  reason,  while  they  are  infants,  carried  on 
first  by  means  of  signs,  and  then  step  by  step  by  means 
of  words  ?  Is  it  not  a  point  of  progress  and  of  triumph, 
when  one  word  after  another  is  successfully  substituted 
for  the  signs  which  had  been  employed  to  signify  the 
same  things?  And  so  with  respect  to  deaf  mutes. 
Has  not  every  attempt  to  instruct  them,  and  every 
system  of  instruction  from  the  beginning,  proceeded  on 
the  assumption  that  an  exhibition  of  some  species  of 
signs,  the  instrumentality,  significance,  and  purpose  of 
which  was  obvious  to  their  apprehension  by  sight  or 
touch,  was  indispensable  to  their  exercise  of  thought  ? 
Is  there  any  evidence  that  they  ever  think  apart  from 
the  instrumentality  of  signs,  casually,  or  systematically 
furnished,  consciously  cognized,  and  remembered  ? 

But  whether  or  not  infants  and  mutes  have,  or  possi- 
bly may  have,  thoughts  without  words  or  equivalent 


OF   THE    HOLY"   SCRIPTURES.  177 

signs,  is  in  no  respect  essential  or  important  to  our 
question.  It  is,  we  presume,  a  fact  which  the  conscious- 
ness of  all  adults,  who  are  not  deaf  and  dumb,  will 
verify,  that  they  think,  are  conscious  of,  and  receive 
thoughts  only  in  words ;  and  therefore  if  there  be  any 
inspiration  of  thoughts  into  the  minds  of  such  adults, 
it  must  be  an  inspiration  inclusive  of  the  words  which 
express  the  thoughts.  This  conclusion,  we  are  fain  to 
believe,  is  not  impaired  by  any  metaphysical  theory, 
unless  it  be  a  theory  to  the  effect,  that  no  thoughts 
are  conveyed  by  inspiration ;  or  a  theory  that  by  in- 
spiration thoughts  are  conveyed  without  words.  But 
this,  contrary  to  our  view,  would  imply  a  suspension 
of  those  laws  of  the  mind  by  which  men  consciously 
think  and  receive  thoughts  only  in  words. 

The  question  comes  finally  to  this :  Did  the  inspira- 
tion which  is  affirmed  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  impart, 
convey,  transfer,  to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  penmen 
the  thoughts  which  they  were  to  express  in  writing  ; 
or  did  that  inspiration,  instead  of  conveying  any 
thoughts  whatever,  only  excite,  enlighten,  assist  and 
guide  the  writers  in  the  exercise  of  their  faculties? 
There  is  no  middle  ground  between  these  two  views ; 
and  under  one  or  the  other  of  them,  every  theory  of 
inspiration  is  necessarily  to  be  classed.  A  theory 
founded  on  the  view  first  mentioned,  will  include  rev- 
elations and  all  that  is  supernatural  and  Divine  in  that 
which  constitutes  the  Scriptures.  A  theory  founded 
on  the  second  view  must  exclude  revelations,  and  in- 
clude only  what  human  agency,  assisted  and  guided 
according  to  circumstances,  is  able  to  accomplish. 

Hence  the   '  dynamical '  theory,  though  if  strictly 

8* 


178  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

construed,  it  would  ascribe  to  human  agency  with  the 
rest  of  their  contents,  whatever  of  original  revelations 
the  Scriptures  contain,  as  amended  and  held  by  Pro- 
fessor Lee,  excludes  revelations  altogether,  and  im- 
putes to  human  agency,  assisted,  enlightened,  guided, 
combined  with  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  form 
and  substance,  the  thoughts,  and  language,  the  composi- 
tion and  recording  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

II.  The  Author's  Theme,  Theory,  and  Definitions. 

The  author  of  these  Discourses  announces  as  his 
theme  :  "  The  inspiration  of  Holy  Scripture."  He  pro- 
poses to  supply  "  a  fundamental  examination  of  the 
nature  of  this  Divine  influence."  (Pref.  iii.)  But  it  is 
evident  from  his  definitions,  and  from  his  reasonings  and 
illustrations,  that  he  had  no  distinct  and  definite  appre- 
hension of  his  theme.  Inspiration  is  an  act — a  breath- 
ing into.  He  treats  of  it  as  an  effect.  It  is  purely  a 
Divine  act.  He  treats  of  it  as  a  joint  effect  of  Divine 
and  human  agency  combined.  Practically,  he  believes 
that  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  the  infallible  word  of 
Grod.  Theoretically,  he  treats  of  them  as  constituted 
of  a  Divine  and  a  human  element.  He  believes  them, 
as  written,  to  be  the  infallible  word  of  God.  But 
he  rejects  the  belief  that  the  words  which  constitute 
the  writing  were  conveyed  to  the  minds  of  the  writers 
by  inspiration.  He  holds  to  the  plenary  inspiration  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  rejects  the  notion  of  different  de- 
grees of  inspiration.  But  he  holds  also  that  the  words 
of  Scripture,  as  denoting  the  human  element,  were  se- 
lected by  the  writers.  He  holds  that  there  is  a  specific 
difference  between  revelation  and  inspiration ;  that 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  17'- » 

revelation  is  the  peculiar  function  of  the  Logos,  and  in- 
spiration the  peculiar  function  of  the  Holy  Spirit; 
and  he  also  holds  that  revelations  included  the  words 
in  which  they  were  made,  and  that  inspiration,  whether 
of  what  had  been  revealed,  or  of  what  was  previously 
known,  did  not  include  the  words.  He  holds  that  the 
Divine  influence  in  Inspiration  was  exerted  as  a  guid- 
ing influence  on  the  faculties  of  the  sacred  writers  in 
combination  with  their  exercise  of  their  own  agency 
according  to  the  peculiarities  of  their  education,  tem- 
perament, genius,  social  position,  and  circumstances, 
respectively.  He  rejects  the  so-called  ' mechanical' 
theory  of  Inspiration,  because  it  excludes  what  he 
terms  the  '  Human  element  of  the  Bible ' ;  and  adopts 
the  '  Dynamical  theory,'  on  the  hypothesis  that  a  com- 
bination and  coaction  of  Divine  and  human  agency  in 
the  'composition'  of  the  Bible,  will  account  for  the 
peculiar  styles  and  idioms  of  the  respective  writers. 

Such  are  some  of  the  paradoxes  exhibited  in  his  dis- 
cussion ;  and  they  call  for  notice  because  they  occur  in 
what  are  set  forth  as  the  reasons  why  we  are  to  believe 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  in  the  human  language,  styles, 
and  idioms  by  which  they  are  actually  characterized, 
to  be  the  infallible  word  of  God.  The  reasons  set  forth 
are,  as  we  apprehend,  not  the  true  reasons  ;  and  there- 
fore, as  the  author  adheres  throughout  to  his  belief  that 
the  Bible  is  the  infallible  word  of  God,  he  is  inconsist- 
ent with  himself.  His  theory  is  unsound ;  and  his  ef- 
forts to  sustain  it,  are  confused,  bewildered,  and  incon- 
clusive. He  rejects  a  verbal  inspiration,  because  the 
language,  phraseology,  and  style  of  the  sacred  text  is  the 
language,  phraseology,  and  style  of  man,  which,  there- 


180  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

fore,  can  not  be  relied  on  in  support  of  "the  great 
doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture."  Criti- 
cism, he  says,  decides  this.  Yet  the  Scriptures  are  the 
infallible  word  of  God  as  they  actually  exist  in  that 
very  language,  in  its  various  styles  and  idioms,  which 
the  alleged  criticism  condemns.  The  criticism,  how- 
ever, evidently  contemplates  the  words  of  Scripture 
as  merely  human,  and  as  having  been  employed  at  dis- 
cretion upon  mere  human  authority,  and  therefore 
decides  against  their  infallibility.  One  would  think 
that  a  firm  believer  in  their  infallibility,  would  reply 
to  the  critics :  '  You  mistake  the  matter.  You  assume 
that  the  words  emplo}^ed  to  express  the  thoughts  which 
were  conveyed  to  the  sacred  writers  by  inspiration 
were  selected  by  them,  and  employed  on  their  au- 
thority. Whereas,  though  the  words  were  such  as  the 
writers  understood,  and  were  in  the  habit  of  using,  and 
would  naturally  use  in  such  a  case,  they  were,  as  the 
infallible  vehicle  of  the  thoughts  to  be  expressed,  se- 
lected, and  inspired  into  their  minds  by  the  Divine 
Author  and  giver  of  those  thoughts,  by  whom  all 
Scripture — that  which  is  written — was  given  by  inspi- 
ration: and  therefore  they  are  the  words  of  God. 
Though  the  words  were  the  same  which  men  used  in 
their  intercourse  with  each  other,  they  were  also  the 
same  which  God  used  in  speaking  audibly  to  men,  in 
writing  on  the  tablets  of  stone,  in  conveying  His 
thoughts  to  the  minds  of  the  prophets  and  apostles,  in 
visions,  trances,  dreams,  in  recalling  and  renewing  to 
their  consciousness  what  he  had  previously  spoken — in 
every  act  by  which  He  inspired,  inbreathed,  conveyed, 
His  thoughts  into  the  minds  of  men.  As  used  by  Him 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTUKES.  181 

to  convey  His  thoughts  to  men,  they  were  as  truly  His 
words,  as  they  are  man's  words,  when  he  uses  them  to 
convey  his  own  thoughts  to  his  fellow-men.  To  criti- 
cise the  Scripture  use  and  authority  of  them  as  though 
they  were  not  God's  words,  and  infallible  as  He  uses 
them,  but  man's  words,  and  fallible  as  he  uses  them,  is  a 
mistake,  and  no  inference  from  such  criticism  can  stand.' 
But  instead  of  replying  after  this  manner,  the  author 
yields  what  the  rationalistic  critics  assume,  and  sets 
himself  to  contrive  and  show  how  man's  words  can  be- 
come the  words  of  God.  And  this,  which  he  regards 
as  the  great  problem  of  Inspiration,  he  labors  to  solve 
by  assuming  that  Inspiration  is  not  simply  a  Divine 
act ;  but  a  result  of  Divine  and  human  action  combined. 
"The  Bible" — that  is,  the  Scripture,  the  writing,  the 
words  written — "  consists  of  both  a  Divine  and  a  hu- 
man element."  (P.  21.)  "  On  the  one  hand,  God  has 
granted  a  revelation ;  on  the  other,  human  language 
has  been  made  the  channel  to  convey,  and  men  have 
been  chosen  as  the  agents  to  record  it."  (P.  18.)  But 
the  fact  that  human  language  was  made  the  chan- 
nel or  vehicle  to  convey  the  revelations  to  men,  which 
are  written  in  the  Bible,  does  not  prove  that  the  Bible 
consists  of  "  two  distinct  elements,  the  Divine  and  the 
human."  The  language  existed  prior  to  any  revela- 
tions being  made.  It  is  not  human,  as  being  of  the 
nature  of  man.  He  was  not  born  with  it.  He  did  not 
invent  it.  It  is  no  further  human  than  as  being  used 
by  men  to  convey  their  thoughts  to  each  other.  In  that 
sense  it  is  as  much  angelic  and  Divine  as  it  is  human. 
The  earliest  account  we  have  of  its  being  spoken,  re- 
presents it  as  being  spoken  by  Jehovah  ;  and  the  first 


182  THE    PLENAKY    INSPIRATION 

notice  we  have  of  any  thing  having  been  written  in  it, 
is  that  of  its  being  written  by  the  finger  of  God.  If  it 
is  man's  as  used  by  him,  it  is  God's  as  used  by  Him. 
If  he  used  it  in  conveying  revelations,  that  use  of  it 
could  not  impart  a  human  element  to  what  He  reveal- 
ed. If  the  prophets  and  apostles  received  the  revela- 
tions in  the  words  of  God,  audibly  uttered,  or  conveyed 
to  them  by  inspiration,  their  writing  the  same  words 
could  not  alter  them  or  impart  to  them  a  human  ele- 
ment, any  more  than  their  speaking  the  very  words 
which  they  heard,  or  received,  and  were  rendered  con- 
scious of,  by  inspiration,  could  impart  to  them  a  human 
element.  If  they  were  the  words  of  God,  spoken  or 
inspired,  before  the  prophets  vocally  repeated  them,  or 
committed  them  to  writing,  neither  their  involuntary 
acts  in  hearing,  or  receiving  them  by  inspiration,  nor 
their  voluntary  acts  in  speaking  or  writing  them,  could 
possibly  add  any  human  or  other  element  to  them,  or 
affect  their  nature  or  character  in  any  respect.  As  well 
might  one  pretend  that  the  vocal  utterance  by  Satan  of 
words  which  men  use  and  understand,  imparted  a  Sa- 
tanic element  to  them  and  to  the  book  in  which  they 
are  recorded  ;  or  that  the  utterance  of  words  by  angels 
imparted  an  angelic  element  to  the  book  containing 
them.  And  with  equal  propriety  it  might  be  assumed 
as  the  basis  of  a  physical  theory,  that  the  respiration 
of  inhaled  air  from  the  lungs,  imparted  an  element  of 
man's  nature  to  the  atmosphere.  That  which  the  au- 
thor treats  as  a  distinct  human  element  of  the  Bible,  is 
no  more  an  element  of  it  than  paper,  types,  printing 
and  binding.  The  Bible  consists  of  the  words  of  God 
as  they  were  received,  by  the  writers,  by  inspiration, 


OF   THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURES.  183 

to  be  written  by  them,  with  their  own  hands,  or  by  the 
hands  of  amanuenses  to  whom  they  dictated,  as  Jere- 
miah to  Baruch,  "  who  wrote  from  the  mouth  of  Jere- 
miah all  the  words  of  the  Lord,  which  He  had  spoken 
unto  him,  upon  a  roll  of  a  book."  (Chap.  36.) 

If  it  be  supposed  that  the  author  only  meant  by  the 
human  element,  the  peculiar  styles,  idioms,  and  colloca- 
tions of  the  respective  writers,  that  can  not  help  the 
matter  in  any  way.  For  the  Bible  is  infallible  not- 
withstanding those  peculiarities ;  and  if  the  contents, 
exactly  as  they  are  written,  were  conveyed  into  the 
minds  of  the  writers  by  inspiration,  then  it  is  their  be- 
ing inspired  that  renders  them  infallible,  and  they  are 
the  words  of  God  solely  because  He  used  and  inspired 
them.  If  they  were  not  inspired,  but  are  a  human  ele- 
ment, added  as  man's  words  by  man's  agency,  then 
they  are  not,  in  their  source  or  their  nature,  or  as  he 
used  them,  infallible,  and  coming  from  that  source  and 
being  in  their  nature  fallible,  »it  is  as  inconceivable  that 
as  such  human  element,  they  should  be  rendered  infalli- 
ble, as  it  is  that  man's  nature,  the  elements  of  his  nature, 
or  his  acts,  peculiarities,  and  passions,  should  be  ren- 
dered Divine. 

If  in  any  sense  the  language,  the  words  of  which  the 
Bible  consists,  or  the  act  of  writing  them,  or  both  to- 

/  c>  / 

gether,  constitute  a  distinct  human  element  of  the 
Scriptures,  then  the  same  words  when  audibly  spoken 
by  Jehovah  to  the  Patriarchs,  to  Moses,  the  Israelites, 
the  prophets,  the  people  of  Judea,  and  the  apostles,  and 
when  spoken  to  angels,  or  by  the  Father  to  the  Son, 
and  by  the  Son  to  the  Father,  must  have  had  that  same 
human  element  in  them  ;  and  must  therefore  have  been 


184  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

otherwise  than  infallible.  And  so  also  if  vocally  ut- 
tered by  Jehovah  to  a  prophet,  and  vocally  reiittered 
by  him,  as  really  as  if  reiittered  in  writing.  If  the 
human  element  is  an  inherent  quality  of  the  words, 
then  it  must  have  been  an  element  of  what  Jehovah 
himself  wrote,  as  much  as  of  any  thing  which  He  com- 
manded Moses  and  the  prophets  to  write  ;  and  an  ele- 
ment of  what  He  spoke — comprising  more  than  half 
of  all  the  words  contained  in  the  Scriptures — as  much 
as  of  what  He  commanded  the  prophets  and  apostles  to 
speak  :  and  therefore,  to  that  extent  the  human  element 
was  not  the  result  of  any  combination  of  Divine  and 
human  agency  in  His  writing  and  speaking,  for  there 
was  none.  And  if  the  human  element  was  not  inher- 
ent in  the  words,  but  was  imparted  by  the  acts  of  man 
in  hearing,  repeating,  and  writing  the  words  which  had 
been  audibly  spoken  by  Jehovah,  and  which,  as  spoken 
by  Him,  were  infallible,  and  free  from  the  alleged  ele- 
ment, then,  as  repeated  and  written  by  the  prophets, 
they  were  not  the  same  as  before,  they  were  tainted  by 
a  new  quality,  a  human  element,  rendering  them  falli- 
ble. And  so  of  all  the  words  of  Scripture  which  were 
conveyed  to  the  sacred  writers  by  inspiration.  As 
conveyed,  they  were  free  from  any  human  element ; 
they  were  in  the  strictest  sense,  the  words  of  God. 
And  if  the  sacred  penmen  wrote  those  words  as  they 
received  them,  then  their  acts  in  receiving  and  writing 
them,  did  not  add  any  human  element  or  any  other 
quality  to  them. 

The  author  primarily  mistakes  and  is  misled  by  his 
assumption  that  the  Bible  consists  of  two  distinct  ele- 
ments— a  Divine  and  a  Human  element.  His  entire 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  185 

theory  rests  upon  this  baseless  assumption.  For  this 
he  rejects  the  doctrine  of  verbal  inspiration,  and  holds 
that  inspiration  was  an  influence  exerted  on  the  facul- 
ties of  man  in  conjunction  or  combination  with  man's 
agency.  Hence,  as  he  rejects  the  idea  that  man's 
agency  had  any  thing  whatever  to  do  in  originating  or 
imparting  revelations,  he  holds  to  a  specific  difference 
between  revelation,  as  to  its  source  and  author,  and  in- 
spiration and  its  source  and  author. 

We  propose,  after  some  further  notices  of  the  au- 
thor's own  theory,  to  speak  of  the  tendency  and  the 
inconsistency  of  his  views  ;  to  illustrate  his  paradoxes 
by  quotations,  showing  that  he  had  no  clear  or  definite 
conception  of  his  theme,  and  that  his  statements  and 
reasoning  are  painfully  inconsistent  and  inconclusive ; 
to  examine  his  reasons  for  rejecting  the  doctrine  of  ver- 
bal inspiration ;  and  lastly,  to  examine  what  he  ad- 
vances to  sustain  his  peculiar  views  of  revelation  as 
distinguished  from  inspiration. 

We  shall  pursue  these  topics  at  some  length,  and 
probably  at  the  expense  of  some  tedious  repetition. 
For  if  he  has  rightly  conceived  of  the  nature,  the  mode, 
or  the  effects  of  Divine  inspiration  ;  if  his  reasons  for 
rejecting  the  doctrine  of  verbal  inspiration  are  sound ; 
and  if  there  is  such  a  distinction  between  revelation 
and  inspiration  as  he  endeavors  to  maintain,  then  the 
whole  question  concerning  the  plenary  inspiration  and 
infallibility  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is  involved  in  far 
deeper  embarrassment  and  difficulty  than  has  hitherto 
been  imagined  by  those  who,  on  their  own  internal 
evidence  and  the  witness  of  the  Spirit,  have  believed 
the  Scriptures  to  be  in  truth  the  word  of  God.  And, 


186  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

on  the  other  hand,  if  he  has  erred  and  failed  in  these 
salient  and  leading  features  of  his  system,  then  his 
discourses  are  not  adapted  to  accomplish  their  pro- 
fessed object ;  they  can  not  fail  to  bewilder  and  mis- 
lead the  inquirer ;  they  clear  up  nothing  that  the 
main  question  really  involves ;  they  advance  new  as- 
sumptions and  new  theories,  and  support  them  by  in- 
conclusive reasonings  and  citations,  but  they  contribute 
nothing  towards  removing  any  real  difficulties,  or  re- 
futing any  of  the  objections  or  false  theories  of  philoso- 
phical or  other  skeptics. 

At  the  same  time,  while  such  are  the  conclusions 
which  we  entertain,  and  shall  endeavor  to  justify  re- 
specting these  discourses,  it  is  but  just  to  say,  that  the 
author  appears,  in  so  far  as  his  personal  character  is 
disclosed,  to  be  a  devout  and  sincere  Christian  man, 
and  a  firm  believer  in  the  Divine  inspiration  and  infal- 
libility of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  And  he  is  evidently 
a  very  diligent  reader  and  collector  of  the  opinions  and 
sayings  of  other  men.  But  it  is  quite  manifest,  that 
his  powers  of  discrimination  and  judgment  are  among 
the  least  of  his  qualifications.  He  does  not  appear  to 
discern  whether  or  not  his  reasonings  and  quotations 
are  apposite  as  proofs  of  the  point  he  has  in  hand  ; 
nor  when  a  position  is,  or  is  not,  established  by  argu- 
ment or  testimony.  He  is  sincere,  warm-hearted, 
zealous — but  wanting,  in  respect  to  the  logical  faculty. 
If  this  is  disparaging  to  him  as  a  writer  on  one  of  the 
most  important  and  most  sacred  of  all  subjects,  the  ad- 
mission of  it,  nevertheless,  is  absolutely  necessary  to  ac- 
count for  the  inconsistencies  which  are  to  be  noted,  be- 
tween his  speculative  theories,  and  his  practical  re- 
ligious feelings  and  beliefs. 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  187 

The  leading  positions  which  are  advanced  and  de- 
fended in  this  work,  are : 

That  every  part  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  is  inspired  : 

That  the  so-called  "  Mechanical"  theory  of  inspira- 
tion which  teaches  that  all  the  words  of  Scripture  were 
conveyed  to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers  directly, 
or  by  dictation  of  the  Spirit,  is  to  be  rejected  as  mak- 
ing the  writers  mere  machines  ;  and  not  accounting  for 
the  diversities  and  peculiarities  of  their  styles  and 
idioms : 

That  inspiration  was  not  a  Divine  act  by  which 
thoughts  or  words,  or  thoughts  in  words,  were  con- 
veyed to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers. 

That  inspiration  is  "  that  actuating  energy  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  which  guided  the  prophets  and  apostles  in 
officially  proclaiming  the  will  of  God  by  word  of 
mouth,  and  in  committing  to  writing  the  several  portions 
of  the  Bible."  (Pp.  28,  148.) 

That  the  real  question  with  which  the  inquiry  or 
discussion  is  concerned,  is  the  result  of  this  Divine  influ- 
ence as  presented  to  us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

That  the  Bible  consists  of  two  distinct  elements — a 
Divine  and  a  human  element.  This  is  "the  first  of 
the  two  conditions  of  the  problem  of  inspiration ;  a 
condition  which  can  be  satisfied  only  by  showing  how 
the  two  elements  may  be  combined." 

That  there  is  a  radical  distinction  between  revelation 
and  inspiration  ;  revelation  being  the  peculiar  function 
of  the  Logos — inspiration,  that  of  the  Spirit  in  com- 
bination with  the  agency  of  the  sacred  writers :  and  a 
specific  difference,  since  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  in 
inspiration  is  an  influence  exerted  on  the  faculties  of 
man,  not  a  Divine  act  conveving  revelations  to  him. 


188  THE    PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

That  the  language  of  the  sacred  writers,  was,  with 
the  guidance  of  the  Spirit,  selected  by  them  ;  and  that 
the  Spirit,  "  embracing  the  entire  activity  of  those 
whom  He  inspired,  rendered  their  language  the  word 
of  God."  (P.  33.) 

That  "  in  the  combination  of  the  tivo  elements, 
namely,  the  actuation  by  the  Spirit  of  Grod,  and  the 
distinct,  but  subordinate  agency  of  man, — consists  the 
'  dynamical'  theory  of  inspiration,"  which  the  author 
adopts.  (P.  142.) 

That  "  the  human  element,  instead  of  being  sup- 
pressed, becomes  an  integral  part  of  the  agency  em- 
ployed ;  moulded,  it  is  true,  and  guided,  and  brought 
into  action  by  the  cooperation  of  the  Spirit,  but  not 
the  less  really,  on  that  account,  participating  in  the  re- 
sult produced."  (P.  145.) 

"  That  a  considerable  portion  of  what  the  Bible  con- 
tains consists  of  matters  already  known  to  the  sacred 
writers,  or  the  knowledge  of  which  might  be — nay, 
which  we  actually  know  often  was — derived  from  the 
ordinary  sources  of  information  that  were  at  their 
command."  (P.  145.) 

To  illustrate  his  idea  of  a  "  vital  '  dynamical'  com- 
bination, or  interpenetration  of  the  human  spirit  and  the 
divine,"  he  says :  "  The  effect  produced  by  the  Holy 
Spirit's  influence  was  a  completely  harmonious  blend- 
ing of  the  human  and  the  Divine  intelligence ;  and 
that  the  result  of  this  combination — whether  we  speak 
of  the  Old  or  of  the  New  Testament — was  that  dis- 
tinct energy  which  has  received  the  name  of  inspira- 
tion." (P.  281.) 

According  to  his  formal  definition,  (P.  28,)  inspira- 


OF   THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  189 

tion  was  an  energy  of  the  Spirit,  which  guided  the 
prophets  and  apostles  in  proclaiming  the  will  of  God 
orally,  and  in  committing  to  writing  the  several  parts 
of  the  Bible — that  is,  guided  them  in  speaking  and 
writing  officially.  If  it  was  in  any  sense  an  act,  it  was 
only  a  guiding  act.  It  did  not  communicate  any  thing 
to  them,  whether  of  thoughts  or  words,  but  only  guid- 
ed them  in  their  acts  of  speaking  and  writing.  What- 
ever was  communicated  to  them  to  be  spoken  or  writ- 
ten was  communicated  by  revelation,  which  he  under- 
stands to  be  "  a  direct  communication  from  God  to 
man,"  and  which  he  ascribes,  not  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
but  exclusively  to  the  Logos.  According  to  his  view, 
the  Spirit  communicated,  imparted,  conveyed,  revealed 
nothing.  The  part  ascribed  to  Him  in  relation  to  the 
Bible  was  that  only  of  guiding  the  human  agents,  in 
speaking  and  writing  both  what  it  contains  that  was 
known  to  them  before,  and  what  they  received  by 
revelation.  This  is  his  theory  of  the  nature  of  inspira- 
tion. It  is  founded  in  his  assumption  that  the  Bible 
consists  of  two  distinct  elements  —  a  Divine  and  a 
human  element.  The  human  element  is  the  agency  of 
men,  as  speakers  and  writers ;  the  Divine  element  is 
the  guidance  of  them  in  their  acts  of  speaking  and 
writing.  The  combination  of  these  two  distinct 
agencies  solves  the  problem  of  the  two  elements  of 
which,  on  his  assumption,  the  Bible  consists,  and 
which  the  mechanical  theory  knew  nothing  of,  and  was 
not  competent  to  solve  !  The  entire  Bible  is  therefore 
inspired,  because  the  human  agents  in  speaking  and 
writing  it,  were  equally  guided  in  respect  to  every  part. 
They  spoke  and  wrote  it  in  their  oivn  human  words, 


190  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

styles,  and  idioms,  words  selected  and  collocated  by 
them,  just  as  they  would  have  done  had  all  the  things 
of  which  they  spoke  and  wrote  been  familiarly  known  to 
them  beforehand  without  revelation ;  but  the  alleged 
guidance  converted  their  fallible  words  into  the  infalli- 
ble words  of  God!  Such,  if  we  understand  his  theory 
and  his  language,  or  discern  the  import  and  purpose  of 
his  arguments,  is  his  doctrine  of  inspiration.  Whether 
it  is  any  more  scriptural  as  a  doctrine,  or  rational  as  a 
theory,  than  the  doctrines  and  theories  of  Davidson, 
Morell,  Coleridge,  and  their  German  masters,  it  would 
be  a  waste  of  time  to  inquire.  We  can  not  hesitate  to 
pronounce  it  irrational  and  absurd  as  a  theory,  and  in 
every  respect  and  degree  unscriptural  as  a  doctrine ; 
not  only  inconsistent  with  Scripture,  but  contrary  to 
every  thing  that  is  said  in  Scripture  concerning  the 
agency  and  the  acts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  work  of 
inspiration.  The  Logos  Himself  told  His  apostles  with 
reference  to  their  speaking  in  their  official  capacity, 
"It  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Holy  Ghost;"  and 
therefore  to  preclude  their  selecting  words  as  their  own, 
or  attempting  to  combine  any  human  element,  or  mix 
up  their  agency  with  that  of  the  Spirit,  He  expressly 
forbade  them  to  premeditate  what  they  should  say. 
So  far  as  their  agency  was  to  be  employed  in  uttering 
any  thing  officially,  orally  or  in  writing,  they  were  to  ut- 
ter it  not  in  man's  words,  not  in  words  taught  or  selected 
by  man's  wisdom,  but  in  God's  words,  words  taught  them 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  simultaneously  with  their  act  of  ut- 
terance. And  Paul  avers  with  reference  to  his  own  offi- 
cial utterances  and  those  of  his  fellow-apostles,  inclusive 
of  what  he  was  then  writing,  and  inclusive  by  just  im- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  191 

plication  of  all  the  apostolic  utterances,  oral  and  written, 
that  the  things  which  God  had  revealed  to  them  by  the 
Spirit,  they  spoke  in  the  words  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
taught  them,  not  in  the  words  which  man  taught. 
(1.  Cor.  1.)  That  is,  they  spoke  not  man's  words  as 
such,  but  God's  words,  as  taught,  conveyed,  inspired 
by  the  Spirit.  Again  in  his  1st  Epistle  to  Timothy 
where,  in  writing  an  express  revelation,  a  prediction, 
made  not  at  some  earlier  date,  from  another  source  or 
by  another  Divine  person,  but  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  he 
says,  "  Now  the  Spirit  speaketh  expressly'' — utters, 
expresses,  in  words — "that  in  the  latter  times  some 
shall  depart  from  the  faith,  giving  heed  to  seducing 
spirits,  and  doctrines  of  devils,"  etc.  To  the  like 
effect  in  reference  to  his  utterances  in  writing,  David, 
the  Psalmist  of  Israel,  in  his  last  words,  says :  "  The 

\j 

Spirit  of  the  Lord  spake  by  me,  and  His  ivord  was  in 
my  tongue."  (2  Sam.  23.)  Nehemiah,  reviewing  the 
past  history  of  his  nation,  and  the  forbearance  of  God 
towards  them,  says  :  "  Thou  testifiedst  against  them  by 
Thy  Spirit  in  Thy  prophets."  (Chap.  9.)  To  testify  is 
to  articulate,  utter,  declare  in  words,  vocally  or  by 
writing.  Ezekiel,  2  and  3,  says :  "The  Spirit  en- 
tered into  me  when  He  spake  unto  me."  He  then 
proceeds  to  record  the  words  which  were  spoken.  "I 
heard  Him  that  spake  unto  me.  And  He  said  unto 
me,  Son  of  man,  I  send  thee  to  the  children  of  Israel. 
.  .  .  And  thou  shalt  .speak  my  words  unto  them, 
whether  they  will  hear  or  whether  they  will  forbear ; 
for  they  are  most  rebellious.  But  thou  son  of  man, 
hear  what  I  say  unto  thee  ;  be  not  thou  rebellious  like 
that  rebellious  house  :  open  thy  mouth,  and  eat  that  I 


192  THE   PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

give  thee.     And  when  I  looked,  behold,  an  hand  was 
sent  unto  me ;  and  lo  !  a  roll  of  a  book  was  therein  ; 
and  He  spread  it  before  me  ;  and  it  was  written  within 
and  without.  .  .  .  Moreover  He  said  unto  me,  Son  of 
man,  eat  this  roll,  and  go  speak  unto  the  house  of  Is- 
rael. .  .  .  Then  did  I  eat  it.  ...  and  He  said  unto  me, 
Son  of  man,  go,  get  thee  unto  the  house  of  Israel,  and 
speak  with  my  words  unto  them.  .  .  .  All  my  words 
that  I  shall  speak  unto  thee,  receive  in  thine  heart,  and 
hear  with  thine  ears.     And  go,  get  thee  to  them  of  the 
captivity,  and  speak  unto  them,  and  tell  them,  Thus 
saith  the  Lord  God.  .  .  .  Then  I  came  to  them  of  the 
captivity  .  .  .  and  .  .  .  the  word  of  the  Lord  came 
unto  me,  saying,  Son  of  man,  I  have  made  thee  a 
watchman  unto  the  house  of  Israel:  therefore  hear  the 
word  at  my  mouth,  and  give  them  warning  from  me." 
This,  in  harmony  with  every  thing  asserted  or  im- 
plied in  the  Scriptures  from  beginning  to  end,  con- 
cerning the  agency  'of  the  prophets  and  apostles  in 
speaking  and  writing  in  their  official  capacity,  plainly 
teaches,   that  there  was  no  human   element  in   what 
Ezekiel  spoke  and  wrote  ;  that  he  was  prohibited  and 
debarred  from  speaking  and  writing  any  words  but  the 
words  of  God ;  that  he  was  to  utter  no  words  but  those 
which  he  received  from  God  by  inspiration,  into  his 
heart,  or  understanding,  as  really  as  he  received  food  into 
his  physical  system  by  receiving  it  into  his  mouth  and 
swallowing  it ;  and,  as  the  'judicious  Hooker '  under- 
stood it,  "  that  so  often  as  God  employed  the  prophets  in 
their  official  work,  they  neither  spake  nor  wrote  any 
word  of  their  own,  but  uttered  syllable  by  syllable  as 
the  Spirit  put  it  into  their  mouths."     If  this  is  that 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  193 

*  mechanical  theory '  which,  'entirely  loses  sight  of  the  hu- 
man element  of  the  Bible,'  it  is  nevertheless  the  theory 
of  the  Bible  itself.  It  may  be  stigmatized  by  men 
under  the  delusions  of  idealistic  rationalism,  as  degrading 
the  sacred  penmen  into  mere  machines,  as  leaving  the 
diversity  of  styles  in  different  portions  of  the  Bible  un- 
accounted for,  as  'a  theory  which  can  not  stand  the 
test  of  close  examination,'  and  therefore  has  been 
"  tacitly  abandoned — at  least  by  all  who  are  capable  of 
appreciating  the  results  of  criticism  " — that  is,  the  mo- 
dern rationalistic  criticism,  of  which  "  each  additional 
discovery  in  the  criticism  of  the  Greek  or  Hebrew  text 
confirms  anew  the  conclusion  that  the  great  doctrine 
of  the  infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture  can  no  longer  rely 
upon  such  a  principle  for  its  defense."  (Pref.  p.  1.) 
But  however  stigmatized,  it  can  not  be  denied  or  re- 
nounced without  denying  the  infallibility  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  renouncing  their  Divine  authority  as  being 
the  word  of  God. 

If  a  man  who  really  believes,  or  verily  thinks  that 
he  believes,  that  the  Bible  in  all  its  parts,  chapters, 
sentences,  and  words,  is  the  infallible  word  of  God,  gets 
bewildered  by  the  theories  of  Morell,  Coleridge,  David- 
son, and  the  atheistic  philosophers,  and  to  escape,  in- 
vents, or  takes  up  a  new  theory  of  Inspiration  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  so-called  mechanical  theory,  we  may,  with 
undoubting  confidence,  expect  him  to  be,  in  the  ex- 
pression of  his  practical  sentiments,  beliefs,  and  af- 
fections, wholly  inconsistent  with  his  speculative  theory. 
If  he  has  any  true  faith,  it  rests  on  the  Scriptures 
simply  as  the  infallible  word  of  God  ;  and  will  mani- 
fest itself  at  every  step  in  his  ordinary  way  of  express- 


194  THE   PLENAKY   INSPIRATION 

ing  himself,  when  he  is  not  considering  and  defending 
his  peculiar  theory.  This  accordingly  happens  in  the 
case  of  our  author,  in  a  way  and  to  such  an  extent  as 
unavoidably  to  convince  the  reader  that,  as  mere  mat- 
ter of  speculation,  he  holds  to  one  theory  of  Inspira- 
tion, while  practically  he  holds  the  opposite,  even  the 
mechanical  theory ;  just  as  the  '  idealist '  holds,  as  a 
speculative  theory,  that  matter  has  no  existence,  and 
that  no  physical  or  other  beings  or  phenomena  exist 
externally  to  his  mind;  while,  practically,  all  his 
thoughts,  feelings,  and  actions,  proceed  as  fully  as  those 
of  other  men,  upon  the  settled  conviction  that  matter 
really  exists  externally. 

III.  The  matter  of  his  Discourses — their  tendency — His  inconsistencies 
— His  paradoxes. 

These  Discourses  are  to  a  painful  extent  made  up  of 
insulated,  irrelevant,  and  inconsistent,  sentiments,  opin- 
ions, and  observations,  having  no  logical  connection  or 
basis,  and  being,  in  general,  indebted  for  their  position 
less  to  the  sense  conveyed — which  involves  all  possible 
forms  and  degrees  of  inconsistency — than  to  the  sound 
of  particular  words.  To  an  extent  which  wearies  and 
confounds  the  reader,  they  are  directly  traceable  to  the 
appended  notes,  which  constitute  more  printed  matter 
than  the  text.  One  can  not  read  the  text  and  notes 
together,  without  receiving  an  impression  that  the 
amiable  author,  in  search  of  the  truth,  read  all  the 
authors  within  his  reach  who  say  any  thing  for  or 
against  Kevelation  and  Inspiration,  and  as  often  as  he 
hit  upon  a  passage  in  which  those  words  occur,  it  sug- 
gested to  him  something  for  his  text,  and  at  the  same 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  195 

time  furnished  him  the  matter  of  a  note.  The  text 
accordingly  seems  in  a  large  degree  to  be  a  mere  re- 
flection from  the  notes,  and  they  often  give  it  a  kalei- 
doscopic variety.  In  numberless  instances  the  most 
insignificant  conceits,  quiddities,  conjectures,  queries, 
are  fortified  by  notes  pro  and  con,  from  German,  Eng- 
lish, French,  Latin,  Greek,  or  Hebrew  writers.  Did 
he  first  write  the  text  of  his  Discourses,  conscious  that 
nearly  every  sentiment  expressed  in  them  would  re- 
quire to  be  supported  or  excused  by  a  quotation  from 
some  commentator,  historian,  or  philosopher,  ancient 
or  modern,  and  then  search  out  the  best  auxiliary 
opinions  he  could  find  ?  That  is  scarcely  credible,  or 
even  possible.  Apparently  he  must  have  read  first, 
and  wrote  as  he  read ;  and,  having  set  out  upon  the 
assumption  that  '  the  great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility 
of  Holy  Scripture,'  as  taught  by  the  so-called  'me- 
chanical '  theory  of  inspiration,  could  not  stand  the 
criticism  of  a  school  of  philosophers  who  openly  rejected 
that  '  doctrine.'  on  whatever  theory  it  might  be  af- 
firmed, he,  to  obviate  the  assaults  of  that  skeptical 
criticism,  adopted  a  theory  which,  having  no  founda- 
tion whatever  in  the  Scriptures  themselves,  naturally 
depended  on  such  involuntary  and  indirect  support  as 
might  be  subsidized  in  this  way.  Whether  this  method 
of  casual  aggregation  was  that  actually  pursued  or  not, 
however,  the  Discourses  undeniably  contain  a  vast 
number  of  observations,  suggestions,  topics,  queries, 
allusions,  repetitions,  which  are  in  no  wise  essential  to 
the  main  subject,  and  serve  only  to  clog  and  confuse 
the  discussion,  fatigue  the  reader,  and  show  by  their 
relation  to  the  multifarious  notes  the  extent  and  routine 


196  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

of  the  author's  reading.  And  it  is  but  too  evident, 
that,  while  honest  himself,  and  sincere  in  his  religious 
feelings,  and  in  his  belief  in  the  Divine  authority  and 
infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture,  he  was  bewildered  by 
the  doubts  and  sophistries  of  the  writers  whom  he  read ; 
his  judgment  vacillated  ;  he  imbibed  from  others,  and 
expressed  as  his  own,  contradictory  sentiments,  without 
being  conscious  of  their  inconsistency. 

On  this  ground  only  can  the  sincerity  and  truthful- 
ness of  his  frank  professions  of  faith  in  the  Scriptures, 
as  the  infallible  word  of  God,  be  vindicated,  and  so 
much  the  more  for  that  reason,  it  ought  to  be  exposed. 
As  a  defense  of  the  inspiration  and  infallibility  of 
Scripture,  his  book  concedes  so  much  to  the  neologists 
in  respect  to  the  nature  of  inspiration,  and  in  its  stig- 
matizing rejection  of  the  so-called  'mechanical'  theory, 
and  in  its  reliance  on  a  homo-theistic  theory  which  pre- 
cludes all  ground  of  infallibility  either  in  thoughts  or 
words,  that  it  is  fitted  rather  to  encourage  and  embolden 
the  enemies,  than  to  instruct  and  confirm  the  friends  of 
its  professed  object.     There  is  not  wanting  reason  to 
conclude  that  it  has  had  this  bad  effect  already.     The 
adoption  of  its  peculiar  phrases  and  distinctions  by 
Dr.  Davidson,  in  his  edition  of  Home's  Introduction, 
vol.  2,  strongly  indicates  that  it  encouraged  and  em- 
boldened him  in  his  defection.     That  Theological  pro- 
fessor and  Biblical  critic,  in  his  "  Sacred  Hernieneutics," 
published  in  1843,  discards  the  German  theories,  and 
employs  the  phraseology  of  those  who  held  what  is 
now   so   flippantly   styled   the    '  mechanical '   theory. 
"It  matters  not,"  he  says,  "through  what  instruments 
God  has  communicated  His  will  in  the  accom- 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTUEES.  197 

plishment  of  His  purposes  He  may  employ  whatever 
agency  He  pleases.  But  whether  He  makes  use  of  the 
unlettered  or  the  learned,  the  high  or  the  low,  the 
revelation  communicated  is  all  his  own  ;  .  .  .  they  are  to 
be  regarded  as  the  mere  media  of  intercourse  between 
the  Creator  and  the  creature.  "We  look  beyond  them 
to  the  Great  Author  of  their  inspiration.  ...  It  is  the 
duty  of  reason  to  assent  to  whatever  He  has  said,  as  to 
the  utterance  of  infinite  wisdom  and  unerring  truth." 
A  revelation  communicated,  of  course  includes  the 
words  in  which  it  is  expressed  in  writing,  and  as  such 
is  all  His  own.  In  1854  our  author  published  these 
Discourses,  in  which,  with  special  reference  to  the  di- 
versity of  styles,  in  the  sacred  writings,  he  character- 
izes the  question  of  inspiration  as  a  problem  to  be  solved, 
treats  of  the  combination  of  the  Divine  and  human  agency 
in  inspiration,  of  the  preserved  individuality  of  the  hu- 
man agents  in  what  they  wrote,  and  of  the  occasions  for 
which  they  wrote.  In  1856  Dr.  Davidson  published 
his  revision  of  Home,  in  which,  having  abandoned  his 
former  sentiments,  and  all  that  was  distinctive  of  the 
*  mechanical '  theory,  he  adopts  the  above-quoted  novel 
phraseology,  apparently  to  disguise  and  give  currency 
to  sentiments  as  lax  as  those  of  any  German  ration- 
alist. The  following  are  specimens :  "  There  are 
three  things  which  we  look  upon,  as  clearly  demon- 
strable in  the  writers  of  the  Scriptures,  and  which  serve 
together  to  solve  the  problem,  how  the  diversities  in  the 
teachings  of  Christ  and  those  of  his  apostles,  are  to  be 
explained.  Neither  the  extreme  orthodox  [that  is,  of 
a  real  inspiration  or  dictation  of  thoughts  in  words] 
nor  the  Socinian  solution,  suffices  to  clear  it  up  satis- 


198  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

factorilj.  1st.  The  principle  of  individuality,  which 
presents  to  us  the  apostles  as  thinking  agents,  retaining 
the  peculiar  bias  and  bent  of  their  intellectual  and 
moral  powers,  their  constitutional  temperament  and 
tendencies,  notwithstanding,  and  in  alliance  with  the  in- 
spiration they  professed — leads  us,  while  acknowledging 
in  them  a  real  and  certain  inspiration,  [a  combination 
of  their  agency  with  the  inspiring  agency,]  whereby 
they  become  true  guides  to  the  Church,  in  respect  to 
general  direction,  to  conclude  that  they  had  a  partial  and 
incomplete  inspiration.  [It  did  not,  as  a  Divine  influence, 
include  the  words,  styles,  etc.,  of  the  thinking  human 
agents  acting  in  alliance  or  combination  with  it.]  It 
was  not  full  and  universal,  embracing  all  aspects  and 
particulars  of  a  subject,  nor  was  it  inclusive  of  all  topics. 
In  short,  it  vr&s  partial  and  so  far  imperfect."  (P.  473.) 
"  We  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  Divine  Spirit 
ordinarily  acts  upon  the  human  mind  in  any  other 
method  than  by  uniting  his  influence  'with  it,  and  ele- 
vating it  to  a  higher  and  holier  tone  than  it  could 
otherwise  reach.  The  Divine  Spirit  does  not  supersede, 
or  set  aside,  the  use  of  the  natural  powers,  [that  is,  in 
inspiration,]  but  quickens  and  purifies  them,  so  that  they 
can  see  much  farther  and  higher.  This,  at  least,  was 
commonly  the  case,  though  there  were  doubtless  ex- 
ceptions, to  which  we  shall  allude  hereafter.  When 
we  consider  the  various  phenomena  presented  in  the 
prophecies,  they  are  explicable  by  means  of  the  indwelling 
Spirit  in  connection  with  the  natural  faculties.  It  was 
the  Spirit  that  enabled  prophets  to  speak  in  the  diversi- 
fied strains  of  condemnation,  admonition,  and  comfort 
relating  to  the  present  and  the  future,  by  acting  upon  their 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  199 

mental  powers  with  unusual  force,  and  thus  stimulating 
them  to  give  the  merely  ideal  contents  of  a  divine  message, 
a  practically  intelligible  character."  (P.  449.)  Again  : 
"Inspiration  does  not  necessarily  and  always  imply 
suggestion  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  does  not  exclude  indi- 
viduality, or  suppress  the  exercise  of  the  human  facul- 
ties ;  inspiration  admits  of  degrees,  and  does  not  usually 
reach  the  extent  of  absolute  infallibility."  (P.  766.) 

We  leave  the  reader  to  deduce  his  own  inferences 
from  these  brief  references,  only  observing,  that  while 
our  author  mistook  the  nature  of  inspiration,  and 
yielded  the  true  ground  of  infallibility,  but  still  held 
and  believed  '  the  great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,'  Dr.  Davidson  renounced  the 
doctrine,  as  well  as  the  reality. 

In  his  first  discourse,  at  page  8,  the  author  distin- 
guishes betwen  revelations  by  ivords,  and  revelations 
by  acts,  miracles  ;  and  ascribes  both  exclusively  to  the 
Logos.  "  The  being  to  whom  we  must  ascribe  the  words, 
although  expressed  by  the  messengers  of  God ;  He 
who  in  like  manner,  performed  the  acts,  although  by 
the  instrumentality  of  these  same  agents,  was  the  Logos, 
God's  eternal,  personal  self-revelation;  God,  who  as 
word,  spiritually  yet  really  maintains  the  world."  But 
if  there  was  a  combination  of  divine  and  human  agency 
in  the  revelations  made  in  words,  causing  them  to  con- 
sist of  two  distinct  elements,  a  divine  and  a  human  ele- 
ment, we  must,  from  his  own  statement,  infer  that  there 
was  a  like  combination  in  the  revelations  made  in  acts, 
causing  them  to  consist  of  the  same  two  diverse  ele- 
ments ;  and,  in  so  far  as  human  agency  was  an  element 
in  those  acts,  those  exertions  of  divine  power  which  we 


200  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

call  miracles  —  they  were  neither  supernatural  nor 
contra-natural,  and  could  no  more  serve  the  pur- 
pose of  distinctive,  peculiar,  and  conclusive  divine 
attestations,  than  man's  words  can  have  divine 
infallibility  and  authority.  If  the  acts  of  Moses  in 
stretching  forth  his  hand  and  repeating  the  words  of 
Jehovah,  "  that  the  children  of  Israel  should  go  for- 
ward," imparted  a  human  element  to  the  divine  act 
which  divided  the  waters  of  the  Eed  Sea,  then  may  we 
have  some  probable  ground  for  believing  that  the  ut- 
terance orally  and  in  writing  by  Moses  and  the  pro- 
phets, of  the  words  of  God,  the  Logos,  whether  audibly 
expressed  in  their  hearing,  or  silently  conveyed  to  their 
minds  by  inspiration,  imparted  a  human  element  to 
those  words  and  to  the  thoughts  of  which  they  were 
the  vehicle.  But  if  the  instrumentality  of  the  prophets 
in  receiving  and  uttering  the  words  of  God,  had  no 
other  relation  to  the  truths  expressed  and  their  vehicle, 
than  the  instrumentalitv  of  Joshua  had  to  the  act  of 

«/ 

Jehovah,  which  caused  the  sun  to  stand  still  in  the 
midst  of  heaven,  then  a  theory  which  confounds  their 
instrumentality  with  the  divine  efficiency,  must  be  as 
baseless  as  the  spiritual  inspiration,  plenary  knowledge, 
and  immediate  intuition  of  the  ''word- transcending,' 
idealistic,  and  pantheistic  magicians  and  soothsayers  of 
the  German  school. 

The  confusion  and  obscurity  of  the  author's  ideas,  is 
aggravated  by  his  use  of  other  than  simple  language, 
and  other  than  terms  appropriate  to  his  subject.  This 
feature  of  his  work  would  hardly  be  worthy  of  par- 
ticular notice,  but  that  a  dissection  of  his  novel  phrase- 
ology serves  to  expose  the  crudeness  of  his  theory  in 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  201 

contrast  with  that  which  he  rejects.  Thus  in  the  ela- 
borate paragraphs  in  which  he  defines  and  expounds 
"the  'dynamical'  theory  of  inspiration,  or  that  which 
implies  such  a  divine  influence  as  employs  man's  facul- 
ties according  to  their  natural  laws,"  and  "  by  which 
man  is  not  considered  as  in  any  sense  the  cause  or  the 
originator  of  the  revelation  of  which  God  alone  is  the 
source,  but  human  agency  is  regarded  as  the  condition 
under  which  the  revelation  becomes  known  to  others." 
(P.  25.)  Here,  the  first  assertion,  that  according  to  the 
'dynamical'  theory  of  inspiration,  the  Holy  Spirit  em- 
ploys man's  faculties  in  accordance  with  their  natural 
laws,  is  just  as  true  of  the  'mechanical'  as  of  the  '  dy- 
namical' theory.  It  means  that,  in  the  act  of  inspira- 
tion, the  Holy  Spirit  conveys  His  thoughts  into  man's 
mind,  in  a  way  not  contrary  to  the  laws  which  regulate 
the  natural  exercise  of  his  intellectual  faculties,  but  in 
harmony  with  them,  which  is  what  is  meant,  and  all 
that  is  properly  meant  by  divine  inspiration.  This  in- 
cludes the  words,  as  the  necessary  vehicle  of  the 
thoughts.  For  without  the  words  the  thoughts  could 
not  be  conveyed  to  man's  mind  in  harmony  with  its 
natural  laws,  so  as  to  be  intellectually  and  consciously 
conceived  by  him.  And  as  it  conveys  thoughts  in 
words,  it  conveys  revelations. 

But  the  '  dynamical '  theory  is  not  a  theory  of  con- 
veying thoughts  from  one  mind  to  another,  not  a  theory 
of  inspiration  as  a  divine  act,  but  a  theory  of  effects  on 
man's  faculties  in  uttering,  writing,  publishing,  making 
known  revelations  to  others.  This  is  manifest  in  all  his 
statements  and  reasonings,  and  this  alone  is  consistent 
with  the  qualifying  term  '  dynamical.'  In  mechanical 

9* 


202  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

philosophy,  moving  powers,  forces  which,  cause  motion, 
are  termed  '  dynamical.'  Suppose  a  fluid  to  be  conveyed, 
impelled,  injected  into  a  man's  lungs  by  an  external 
force,  and  that  the  fact  was  stated  in  these  terms.  Would 
any  philosopher  think  it  necessary  to  add  to  the  state- 
ment, that  the  physical  receptacle  of  the  fluid  was  not 
in  any  sense  the  cause  or  originator  of  the  external 
force,  but  must  be  regarded  only  as  the  condition  under 
which  the  injection  took  place  ?  And  what  is  this  but 
nonsense  ?  To  say  that  man  himself  is  not  the  cause 
of  the  external  force  but  is  the  condition  of  its  being 
exerted,  is  the  same  as  to  say,  If  there  were  no  lungs 
capable  of  receiving  a  fluid,  no  fluid  could  be  injected 
by  an  external  force,  and  if  man  had  no  intellectual 
faculties,  no  thoughts  could  be  inspired  into  his  mind, 
and  if  he  was  not  an  intelligent  free  agent,  he  could 
not  utter,  speak,  write,  make  known  to  others,  thoughts 
received  by  inspiration ;  which  is  to  no  more  purpose 
as  a  definition  or  illustration  of  the  nature  of  divine  in- 
spiration, than  it  would  be  to  say  that  the  fact  of  there 
being  thoughts  to  be  conveyed  and  published,  is  a  con- 
dition of  their  being  conveyed  by  inspiration  and  pub- 
lished by  writing. 

That  we  do  not,  in  these  observations,  misconceive 
or  misrepresent  the  author ;  that  he  had  neither  a  scrip- 
tural, nor  any  distinct  and  definite  apprehension  of  his 
theme  ;  that  he  conceived  of  inspiration,  not  simply  as 
a  divine  act,  but  as  a  result  of  a  joint  exercise  of  divine 
and  human  agency  in  the  selection  and  proclamation 
orally  and  in  writing  of  the  words  employed,  is  further 
evident  from  the  necessity  which  he  felt,  in  order  to 
maintain  his  hypothesis  of  two  elements  in  the  Bible,  of 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  203 

asserting  a  radical  distinction  in  respect  to  their  sources 
and  their  objects  "  between  revelation  and  inspiration, 
as  applied  to  the  contents  of  the  Bible."  (P.  81.)  "  In 
whatever  manner  we  conceive  the  Bible  to  convey  to 
us  a  revelation,"  he  observes,  p.  23,  "we  must,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  recognize  its  two  elements. 
Without  the  divine  element,  it  [the  Bible]  would  cease 
to  be  a  revelation ;  [that  is,  as  he  defines  revelation,  it 
would  cease  to  be  "a  direct  communication  from 
God  to  man  ;"  it  would  be  merely  human  ;]  "without 
the  human,"  [supposing  it  to  have  the  divine  element,] 
"the  communication  from  God  would  have  been  con- 
fined to  the  individual  to  whom  it  was  originally  made ;" 
that  is,  it  would  not  have  been  published,  orally  or  in 
writing.  The  revelation — the  direct  communication 
of  the  contents  of  the  Bible  from  God  to  man,  might 
then  have  been  made  to  him  and  received  by  him,  prior 
to  the  intrusion  or  implication  of  any  human  element, 
though  in  such  case  it  would  be  unpublished.  But 
that  which  was  so  communicated  and  received  would  not 

* 

be  a  revelation,  even  to  the  recipient,  without  words  as 
its  vehicle,  and  as  the  instrument  of  his  intellectual 
conception  and  understanding  of  it.  If  then  it  was  or 
might  have  been  made  in  words  intelligible  to  the  re- 
cipient, why  could  he  not  repeat,  proclaim,  and  write 
those  words  as  easily  and  as  perfectly  by  the  unaided 
exercise  of  his  natural  faculties,  as  if  the  communication 
had  been  made  to  him  in  words  by  one  of  his  fellow- 
men  ?  If  it  was  or  might  have  been  made  without 
words,  and  yet  was  a  revelation  communicated  directly 
from  God,  and  received  and  understood  by  man,  and 
as  such  of  course  was  free  from  any  human  element  or 


204  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

taint  whatever,  then  what  inspiration  had  to  do  was 
not  to  reveal  or  communicate  any  thing,  not  to  select, 
disclose,  or  convey  thoughts,  but  only  to  assist  the  pro- 
phet in  his  selection  of  his  own  words  in  his  own  style, 
whereby  to  express  the  non-verbal  thoughts  communi- 
cated directly  from  God  to  him,  and  received  as  reve- 
lations. 

Such  undeniably  is  his  notion,  theoretically,  of  in- 
spiration. "  By  revelation  I  understand  a  direct  com- 
munication from  God  to  man.  By  inspiration,  on  the 
other  hand,  I  understand  that  actuating  energy  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  in  whatever  degree  or  manner  it  may  have 
been  exercised,  guided  by  which  the  human  agents  chosen 
by  God  have  officially  proclaimed  His  will  by  word  of 
mouth,  or  have  committed  to  writing  the  several  portions 
of  the  Bible.  I  repeat,  in  whatever  degree  or  manner 
this  actuation  by  the  Holy  Spirit  may  have  been  exer- 
cised— for  it  should  never  be  forgotten  that  the  real  ques- 
tion with  which  our  inquiry  is  concerned  is  [not  the  nature 
of  inspiration,  but]  the  result  of  this  divine  influence  as 
presented  to  us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  not  the  manner 
according  to  which  it  has  pleased  God  that  this  result 
should  be  obtained."  (P.  28.) 

It  is  apparent  from  this  formal  definition  that  the 
author's  theme  as  announced  in  his  title-page — The 
nature  of  Inspiration — is  not  that  which  he  discusses 
and  endeavors  to  sustain  by  proof.  He  discusses  the 
phenomena  produced  by  what  he  calls  inspiration. 
When  he  comes  to  execute  his  task,  he  vehemently  in- 
sists, "that  the  real  question  with  which  his  inquiry  is 
concerned,  is  the  result  of  this  Divine  influence  as  pre- 
sented to  us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  not  the  manner 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  205 

according  to  -which,  it  has  pleased  God  that  this  result 
should  be  obtained."  As  much  as  to  say  :  I  take  up 
the  Book  which  is  commonly  called  the  Bible.  As  a 

v 

book  it  consists  of  diverse  materials.  Considered  in  one 
respect,  it  consists  of  paper,  ink,  and  binding.  Con- 
sidered in  another  respect,  it  consists  of  words  which 
represent  particular  thoughts.  "When  called  the  Book 
or  the  Bible,  without  any  qualifying  term,  the  paper, 
ink,  and  binding,  alone,  as  combined  and  arranged  in 
a  particular  form  by  skill  and  labor,  may  be  referred 
to.  In  this  sense  the  paper  and  other  materials  of  art 
are  essential  to  it.  They  constitute  it,  as  they  do  all 
similar  products  of  art.  In  this  sense  it  is  purely  hu- 
man— a  result  of  human  skill  and  labor.  It  is  the  re- 
sult of  no  other  agency  or  combination  of  agencies.  It 
has  no  other  element  in  it.  And  all  this  is  as  true  of 
the  distinct  original  rolls  or  books,  which  being  united 
constitute  the  one  book. 

But  when  called  '  the  Holy  Scriptures,'  this  result  of 
human  agency,  skill,  and  labor,  is  not  referred  to.  It 
is  the  written  words  and  the  thoughts  which  they  sig- 
nify and  represent,  that  are  intended  and  referred  to. 
A  Scripture  is  a  writing.  A  collection  of  Scriptures  is 
a  collection  of  writings.  A  writing  is  a  representation 
and  expression  of  thoughts  in  words  ;  as  speaking  is  a 
representation  and  expression  of  thoughts  in  words 
vocally  uttered.  The  act  of  writing — delineating  al- 
phabetic characters  as  they  are  arranged  in  words  and 
sentences — is  as  purely  a  human  act,  as  that  of  casting, 
or  that  of  setting  types,  or  that  of  articulating  words 
by  exercising  the  vocal  organs. 

What  then  is  the  result  of  Inspiration  as  presented  to 


206  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  ?  It  is  not  any  of  the  con- 
stituents of  the  Bible  considered  simply  as  a  book  ;  it 
is  not  the  act  of  writing,  nor  those  constituents  and 
that  act  united  or  combined  with  other  constituents  or 
acts.  They  are  purely  material  and  human.  It  is 
something  to  which  those  constituents  and  that  act  are 
not  necessary  and  indispensable ;  something  prior  to 
them,  and  which,  as  preexisting,  furnishes  the  only 
ground  or  occasion  for  them ;  something  which  may 
be  as  perfectly  uttered,  represented,  expressed,  by  vocal 
articulation,  as  by  alphabetic  characters  written  on  pa- 
per. But,  excluding  those  physical  materials  and  acts, 
there  is  nothing  presented  to  us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures 
but  thoughts  represented,  expressed,  made  visible,  in 
words,  as  the  same  thoughts  are  made  audible  by  a  vo- 
cal articulation  of  the  same  words.  The  thoughts 
necessarily  existed,  and  of  necessity  were  intellectually 
and  consciously  conceived  in  words  as  their  vehicle, 
the  condition  of  their  being  conceived  and  realized  to 
the  human  consciousness,  prior  to  their  being  made 
visible  to  others  by  written  characters,  or  audible  by 
articulate  sounds. 

Were  the  thoughts,  then  the  result  of  Inspiration  as 
presented  to  us  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  ?  No,  says  our 
author.  By  Inspiration  I  understand  that  actuating 
energy  of  the  Holy  Spirit  which  guided  the  human 
agents  in  proclaiming  the  thoughts  (the  will  of  God)  by 
speaking  the  words,  or  by  writing  them.  The 
thoughts  are  due  not  to  Inspiration  but  to  Kevelation ; 
and,  "  while  Inspiration  (as  the  signification  of  the  term 
denotes)  is  the  peculiar  function  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  so, 
in  like  manner,  to  reveal  is  the  office  appropriate  to  the 
Eternal  Word."  (P.  115.) 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  207 

But  the  thoughts  are  embodied  in  the  words.  They 
can  not  be  conceived,  any  more  than  they  can  be 
spoken  and  written  without  the  words ;  and  if  they  were 
revealed,  disclosed,  "directly  communicated"  from  the 
Divine  Logos  to  man,  they  must  have  been  revealed  in 
words.  And  if  the  revelation  of  them  was  exclusively 
the  office  of  the  Logos,  then  the  revelation  of  them 
was  not  a  result  of  inspiration.  The  only  effect  or  re- 
sult of  uthat  actuating  energy  of  the  Holy  Spirit" 
which  the  author  understands  by  Inspiration,  was  that 
of  guiding  the  prophets  in  their  acts  of  uttering  the 
words  of  Scripture,  orally  and  by  writing.  It  could 
not  have  included  a  selection  of  the  words.  That  is 
not  in  his  definition  of  the  result  of  the  actuating  energy, 
and  is  wholly  different  from  '  proclaiming  the  will  of 
God  by  word  of  mouth,  or  committing  to  writing  the 
several  portions  of  the  Bible.'  Besides,  their  agency 
could  not  have  had  any  thing  to  do  with  selecting  the 
words  whereby  to  express  the  thoughts ;  for  without  the 
words  they  could  not  have  had  the  thoughts  to  be  ex- 
pressed ;  they  could  not  have  conceived  them,  or  been 
conscious  of  them.  If  the  thoughts  were  conveyed  di- 
rectly to  them,  the  words  must  have  been  conveyed 
directly  to  them  by  the  Divine  Revealer. 

His  definition  of  Inspiration,  or  rather  of  what  he 
supposes  to  have  been  accomplished  by  inspiration,  is 
founded  on  his  assumed  hypothesis,  that  there  are  two 
distinct  elements  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  because  the 
Bible  as  a  book  consists  of  a  material  part  fabricated 
by  human  agency,  and  of  *  Eevelations  directly  com- 
municated from  God  to  man ' ;  which  hypothesis  ren- 
ders necessary  his  assumed  distinction  between  Kevela- 


208  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

tion  and  Inspiration,  by  which  he  ascribes  all  revelations 
to  one  Divine  Person,  and  all  inspiration  to  another. 
This  theory  followed  out,  leaves  nothing  for  inspira- 
tion to  do  but  to  guide  the  sacred  penmen  in  the  act  of 
writing.  This  is  the  result  of  that  Inspiration,  which 
he  variously  characterizes  as  the  Divine  influence,  the 
actuating  energy,  the  combination  of  the  Divine  with 
human  agency,  and  the  like. 

Accordingly,  he  thus  defines  what  it  was  his  object 
to  accomplish :  "To  show  how  these  elements,  appa- 
rently so  heterogeneous,  may  be  combined ;  to  exhibit 
them  as  not  merely  concurrent,  but  as  absolutely  amal- 
gamated in  one  distinct  energy ; — to  prove,  moreover, 
that,  under  the  controlling  influence  of  the  Divine  prin- 
ciple, there  has  hence  resulted  the  perfect  inspiration  of 
all  the  parts  of  Scripture,  whatever  be  their  subject 
matter, — such  is  the  task  to  which  I  must  now  address 
myself."  (P.  140.) 

But  the  author's  heart  is  far  more  correct  than  his 
speculative  theory.  '  With  his  heart,'  he  believes  that 
the  Holy  Scriptures  are  from  beginning  to  end,  the  in- 
spired and  therefore  the  infallible  word  of  God ;  and 
hence,  while  speculatively  he  rejects  the  theory  called 
*  mechanical,'  which  directly  teaches  that  cardinal  doc- 
trine, the  very  best  sentences  in  his  book  are,  however 
inconsistently  advanced  by  him,  so  many  virtual  testi- 
monies in  its  favor,  and  such  as  those  who  hold  it 
would  be  likely  to  advance.  We  adduce  a  few  exam- 
ples :  "On  the  one  hand,  God  has  granted  a  Eevela- 
tion ;  on  the  other,  human  language  has  been  made 
the  channel  to  convey,  and  men  have  been  chosen  as 
the  agents  to  record  it.  From  this  point  all  theories  on 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  209 

the  subject  of  Kevelation  take  their  rise."     (P.  18.)  .  .  . 
"  While  I  can  by  no  means  accept  the  mechanical  sys- 
tem as  correct,  or  as  consistent  with  the  facts  to  be  ex- 
plained, it  will  be  my  object  in  the  present  Discourses 
to  establish  in  the  broadest  extent  all  that  its  supporters  de- 
sire to  maintain;  namely,  the  infallible  certainty,  the 
indisputable  authority,  the  perfect  and  entire  truthful- 
ness, of  all  and  every,  the  parts  of  Holy  Scripture." 
(P.  19.)     "  It  must  ever  be  borne  in  mind  .  .  .  that  In- 
spiration stamps  the  icord  of  God,  as  such,  in  the  most 
profound  sense  of  the  term."     (P.  31.)     "  The  Holy 
Spirit  operates  ;  that  is,  selects  from  the  mass  of  materials 
which  were  at  the  writer's  command — whatever  may 
have  been  their  character,  whether  known,  or  super- 
naturally  revealed."     (P.  31.)     "  It  is  plain,  that  in  any 
communication  from  an  infinite  Being  to  creatures  of 
finite   capacities,    one   of    two   things   must   happen. 
Either  the  former  must  raise  the  latter  almost  to  His 
own  level,  or  else  He  must  suit  the  form  of  His  com- 
munications to  their  powers  of  apprehension"     (P.  63.) 
"  How  can  infallible  truth  be  infallibly  conveyed  in 
defective    and   fallible   expressions  ? '       [  Coleridge.  ] 
"  What !  not  even  in  the  words  of  Christ  $ ":      [Author.] 
(P.  64.)     The  immemorial  doctrine  and  faith  of  the 
Church,  concerning  inspiration,  he  observes,   "  Starts 
from  that  article  of  the  Creed  in  which  Christians  to 
the  present   day  profess :   '  We  believe  in  the  Holy 
Ghost  .  .  .  who  spake  by   the   prophets.'        (P.  73.) 
"  The  ordinary  style  in  quoting  Scripture  was,  either 
to  omit   the  writer's   name — '  Thus   spake   the   Holy 
Ghost ' ;  or  to  supply  it  thus — '  So  spake  the  Spirit  by 
Solomon,'  or  'by  Isaiah,'  or  'by  Paul.'  .  .  .  Hence 


210  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

the  numerous  epithets  applied  to  every  part  of  Scrip- 
ture— '  The  Scriptures  of  the  Lord,'  '  The  Divine 
Scriptures,'  '  Heavenly  letters.'  The  phrase,  however, 
most  usually  employed,  is  that  of  St.  Paul :  '  Scriptures 
given  by  inspiration  of  God.'  In  a  word,  the  evidence 
under  this  head  may  be  summed  up  in  the  language  of 
St.  Clement,  of  Eome :  '  Give  diligent  heed  to  the  Scrip- 
tures, the  true  sayings  of  the  Holy  Ghost.' ;  (P.  75.) 

When  denning  the  term  prophet,  (Nabi,  Heb.,)  as 
denoting  one  chosen  and  set  apart  to  the  prophetic 
office,  he  says :  "  The  signification  of  the  term,  Nabi, 
may  be  inferred  not  only  from  its  admitted  etymology, 
according  to  which  it  implies  '  a  speaker]  '  one  who  an- 
nounces the  sayings  and  revelations  of  Qod]  but  also  from 
the  explanation  given  by  Jehovah  Himself :  '  The  Lord 
said  unto  Moses,  See,  I  have  made  thee  a  god  (Elohim) 
to  Pharaoh  :  and  Aaron  thy  brother  shall  be  thy  pro- 
phet, (Nabi) ;  the  Lord  having  previously  announced 
to  Moses — Aaron  shall  be  thy  spokesman  to  the  peo- 
ple :  and  he  shall  be  to  thee  instead  of  a  mouth  :  and 
thou  shalt  be  to  him  instead  of  God.'  And  thus  the 
official  Prophet  was,  above  all  others,  God's  spokesman 
to  the  people — the  mouth,  as  it  were,  by  which  Jeho- 
vah uttered  his  commands.'  (P.  162.)  "But,  we 
must  ever  keep  in  mind,  that  the  internal  suggestion 
which  prompts  his  utterance,  neither  proceeds  from,  nor 
is  produced  by,  the  prophets  natural  poioers  or  personal 
condition}1  (P.  167.)  "  The  men  of  God  were  as  fully 
assured  of  the  objective  reality  of  the  divine  communi- 
cations, conveyed  thus  immediately  to  their  souls,  as  we 
are  of  the  objective  reality  of  the  world  which  sur- 
rounds us."  (P.  169.)  "  The  revelations  conveyed  to 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  211 

God's  servants  .  .  .  were  either  communications  made 
when  the  action  of  the  external  senses  was  suspended, 
and  there  was  no  consciousness  of  passing  events ;  or 
they  were  communications  made  in  the  natural  waking 
state,  when  the  prophet  was  conscious  of  all  that  took 
place  around  him."     (P.  170.)     How  then  were  these 
revelations  made  ? — by  inspiration  ?     No,  says  the  au- 
thor— according  to  my  theory  there  is  a  total  difference 
between  Revelation  and  Inspiration.     Revelations  have 
no  human  element  in  them — they  proceed  wholly  from 
the  Divine  Agency — they  are  not  inspired — Inspiration 
proceeds  from,  and  consists  of,  two  Agencies,  the  Di- 
vine and  the  Human,  '  combined,  and  absolutely  amal- 
gamated in  one  distinct  energy ' — Revelation  commu- 
nicates, '  from  the  Divine  to  the  human  Spirit ' — Inspi- 
ration moulds,   forms,   guides,  proclaims   by  writing. 
What  he  ascribes  to  Revelation,  the  Scriptures  ascribe 
to  Inspiration ;  and  all  that  is  left  to  be  ascrited  to  In- 
spiration, is  as  purely  human  as  the  act  of  one  man  in 
recording  the  words  of  another. 

But  to  proceed.  At  page  198,  the  author  has  occa- 
sion directly  to  oppose  a  '  modern  school  of  disbe- 
lievers ' ;  and  in  doing  that,  as  if  unconscious  of  his 
theory,  he  gives  utterance  to  his  practical  belief  as  a 
Christian  believer:  "Holy  Scripture,  in  short,  pre- 
sents the  prophets  to  our  view  as  human  instruments 
through  whom  the  Spirit  of  God  speaks,  and  by  whose  lips 
He  announces  the  Divine  oracles" 

"  The  epithet  {  Holy'  Scripture  intimates  the  special 
relation  of  the  Bible  to  God  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  in 
this  sense  it  is  that  the  apostle  defines  '  all  Scripture,' 
as  '  given  by  inspiration  of  God.'  "  (P.  257.)  By  all 


212  THE   PLENAEY   INSPIRATION 

Scripture,  the  apostle  undoubtedly  meant  all  the  words 
recorded  by  the  sacred  writers  as  given  them  by  in- 
spiration ;  and  if  they  were  given;  imparted,  conveyed, 
to  them  from  God  by  inspiration — breathing  them  into 
their  minds — then  the  writers  had  no  agency  whatever 
concerning  them,  or  any  part  of  them,  or  any  of  their 
peculiarities  of  diction,  till  after  they  had  received 
them  as  what  they  were  to  write,  and  all  their  agency 
in  relation  to  them  was  simply  their  agency  in  writing 
what  had  been  inbreathed  into  their  minds  to  be  writ- 
ten. They  were  holy  men ;  they  were  conscious  of 
what  was  inspired  into  their  minds  to  be  written,  and 
under  that  consciousness  they  spake  and  wrote  as  they 
were  influenced  thereto  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  If ^  there 
was  any  intrusion  of  a  human  element  into  that  which 
they  wrote,  it  must  have  been  by  their  writing  on  their 
own  authority  and  discretion,  what  was  not  given 
them  by  inspiration  of  God,  which  the  apostle  speak- 
ing of  the  Scriptures  as  they  are,  expressly  denies. 

— "Eepeated  pledges  were  given  from  the  lips  of 
the  Son  of  God  Himself,  that  no  occasion  should  arise 
during  the  course  of  their  ministerial  labors  in  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  should  not  instruct  them  '  how  and 
what  they  should  say' : — in  other  words,  that  in  every 
exercise  of  their  apostolic  office,  both  the/orm  and  the 
substance  of  their  statements  should  be  given  them.'1'' 
May  we  not  conclude  with  absolute  certainty,  that 
their  receiving,  by  inspiration,  statements  in  words 
which  they  were  to  utter  before  magistrates  and  perse- 
cutors, did  not  impart  a  '  human  element '  either  to  the 
form  or  substance  of  what  they  said  ?  They  were  ex- 
pressly forbidden  to  premeditate  what  they  should 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  213 

speak,  because  the  words  to  be  uttered  were  not  theirs, 
but  were  the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  The  Old  Testament  writings,  with  reference  to 
their  inward  principle,  are  described  as  '  given  by  in- 
spiration of  God;'  their  language  being  regarded  as  the 
language  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  and  thus  the  Evangelist 
can  say,  '  all  this  was  done  that  it  might  be  fulfilled 
which  was  spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet.' 
(P.  283.)  "  The  New  Testament  writers,  as  well  as 
our  Lord  Himself,  ascribe  the  Old  Testament  to  the 
immediate  agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  (P.  325.) 
"According  to  that  view  of  the  inspiration  of  Scrip- 
ture which  I  have  endeavored  to  maintain,  each  and 
every  portion  of  the  Bible  is  perfect  and  divine." 
(P.  327.) 

But  notwithstandiDg  these,  and  many  similar  expres- 
sions of  his  practical  belief,  he  every  where  in  subser- 
viency to  his  '  dynamical '  notion  of  inspiration,  treats 
of  the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  with  reference  to  the 
production,  bestowment,  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures, 
as  merely  a  guidance  of  the  sacred  writers — or  a  co- 
operation, coaction,  combination  of  His  agency  with 
theirs ;  so  that  their  agency  was  as  much  an  element 
of  inspiration  and  of  the  Scriptures,  as  His  agency 
was.  "  No  artificial  line  of  distinction  is  to  be  drawn 
between  the  human  and  the  Divine  elements  of 
Scripture."  (P.  283.)  "  The  human  testimony  of  the 
apostles  was  exalted  into  Divine  testimony  by  the  co- 
operation of  the  Spirit  of  God."  (P.  288.)  "  It  forms 
a  prominent  feature  of  the  theory  of  inspiration  main- 
tained in  these  discourses,  that  each  writer  of  Scrip- 
ture made  use,  on  all  occasions,  of  such  materials  as 


214  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

were  in  his  power,  whether  supplied  by  his  own  ex- 
perience or  by  the  information  of  others.  This  prin- 
ciple forms  the  foundation  of  the  distinction  between 
Revelation  and  Inspiration."  (P.  319.) 

The  author  entertains  a  confused  and  mystical  view 
of  the  intellectual  condition  and  the  exercises  of  the  pro- 
phets when  receiving  Divine  Eevelations.  He  con- 
tends that  they  had  the  natural  exercise  of  their  facul- 
ties, and  were  intelligently  conscious  of  what  was 
passing ;  and  yet,  under  the  influence  of  his  '  dynami- 
cal '  theory,  he  treats  of  them  as  abnormally  and  ec- 
statically excited,  and  as  not  understanding,  or,  at  least, 
not  always  understanding  what  was  revealed  to  them. 
"  Strange,"  he  observes,  "  would  the  phenomenon  be 
...  of  the  preservation  of  each  writer's  peculiar  indi- 
viduality .  .  .  had  he  been  deprived  of  the  use  of 
those  natural  faculties,  by  means  of  which  he  has  em- 
bodied in  suitable  language  the  ideas  which  were  super- 
naturally  infused  into  his  soul,  and  placed  on  record 
the  details  of  the  revelation  which  they  conveyed.  So 
far,  indeed,  are  the  facts  of  the  case  from  suggesting  a 
suppression  of  the  prophet's  intelligent  consciousness 
as  being  essential  or  even  congruous,  that  we  can  at 
once  discern  how  an  elevation,  rather,  of  all  the  powers 
whereby  ideas  are  apprehended  was,  of  necessity, 
required  for  the  purpose  of  enabling  him  to  receive,  or  to 
transmit  to  others,  the  mysterious  truths  which  were 
disclosed  to  him.  .  .  .  The  prophets  tell  us  how  their 
souls  were  supported,  and  enabled  to  endure  the  sub- 
lime visions  upon  which  they  gazed.  This  is  a  fact 
which,  while  it  proves  that  the  object  of  their  intuitions 
was  no  mere  creation  of  their  own  imaginations — no 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTUEES.  215 

mere  subjective  phantasm — exhibits  at  the  same  time, 
how  their  understanding  was  qualified  to  apprehend  the 
Divine  communication,  and  enabled  to  reproduce  it 
for  the  benefit  of  others."  (P.  205.)  But :  per  contra — 

"  In  giving  utterance  to  miraculous  communications 
from  God,  it  would  seem,  even  d  priori,  to  be  the  more 
reasonable  supposition  that  the  prophet  should  not 
comprehend  the  mysteries  which  have  been  divinely 
imparted  to  him,  to  the  like  extent,  or  in  the  same 
degree  as  an  ordinary  teacher  understands  the  various 
branches  of  information  which  he  has  acquired  by 
study  and  meditation — by  the  exercise  of  human  intel- 
lect, and  the  employment  of  human  industry.  The 
full  meaning  of  the  language  which  he  utters  must, 
from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  extend  beyond  the 
prophet's  own  mental  vision.  That  supernatural  intui- 
tion in  which  the  present  and  the  future  are  intermin- 
gled, and  which  has  arisen  independently  of  the 
human  agent's  own  reflection,  transcends  the  power  of 
his  understanding,  and  can  not  be  analyzed  by  the  dis- 
cursive faculty  of  the  mind."  (P.  208.) 

Here  we  have  the  incongruous,  contradictory,  and 
absurd  representations :  1.  That  the  Prophets,  when 
receiving  revelation,  had  the  free  and  ordinary  use  of 
their  natural  faculties.  2.  That  their  faculties  were 
not  in  the  natural  state,  but  were  all  supernaturally 
elevated  and  excited  to  enable  them  to  apprehend, 
receive,  and  transmit,  the  truths  which  were  revealed. 
3.  That  the  ideas  were  supernaturally  infused  into  their 
souls.  4.  That,  independently  of  their  own  reflections, 
they  discerned  them  by  supernatural  intuition.  5.  That 
they  transcended  the  powers  of  their  understandings. 


216  THE  PLENAKY  INSPIRATION 

6.  That  by  the  use  of  their  natural  faculties  they  em 
bodied  the  ideas  in  suitable  language.  7.  That  the 
full  meaning  of  the  language  which  they  selected,  ex- 
tended beyond  their  own  mental  vision,  elevated  and 
excited  as  they  were  to  the  point  of  supernatural  in- 
tuition. 8.  That  they  did  not  comprehend  the  ideas 
which  were  divinely  imparted  to  them,  and  infused 
into  their  souls,  to  such  a  degree,  even  as  an  ordinary 
teacher  understands  what  he  learns  by  the  unassisted  ex- 
ercise of  his  intellect.  9.  That  they  nevertheless  selected 
words  to  express  the  ideas  which  they  did  not  compre- 
hend— language,  the  meaning  of  which  extended  beyond 
what  they  saw  by  supernatural  intuition.  10.  Truths, 
ideas,  were  revealed  which  in  fact  were  not  revealed 
They  were  discovered  by  intuition,  but  they  were  not 
so  discovered  as  to  be  apprehended  and  understood. 
Words  were  selected  to  express  them  which  did  not 
justly  express  them,  but  expressed  more  than  was 
revealed  or  discovered  by  intuition.  The  words  of 
Scripture  therefore  mean  more  than  was  imparted  to 
the  Prophets  by  revelation.  Ideas  only  were  imparted 
— imperfectly,  obscurely,  infused.  They  were  bare 
ideas,  and,  in  part,  at  least,  imperceptible.  They 
needed  a  human  element.  The  prophets  in  dynam- 
ically supplying  that  element,  used  words  which  tran- 
scend the  import  of  the  revealed  ideas.  Surely  a 
theory  which  denies  that  any  revelations  were  made 
by  inspiration ;  and  teaches  that  revelations  were  im- 
mediate communications  from  God  by  the  infusion  of 
ideas  into  the  soul,  and  that  the  faculties  of  the  pro- 
phets were  so  elevated  and  excited  as  to  enable  them 
by  supernatural  intuition  to  perceive  the  ideas,  ought 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTUKES.  217 

to  provide  that  the  prophets  before  they  embodied  those 
ideas  in  words,  should  be  enabled  to  perceive  them 
clearly,  and  to  select  words  which  would  exactly  ex- 
press the  revealed  ideas,  and  neither  more  nor  less — so 
that  their  readers  at  the  time,  and  ever  afterwards, 
might  know  for  certain  what  was  revealed.  But,  says 
the  author  concerning  certain  passages  of  Scripture, 
they  "  Not  only  illustrate  the  assertion  (1  Pet.  1  :  10) 
that  the  prophets  searched  diligently  for  the  meaning  of 
their  own  words — they  also  afford  conclusive  evidence 
that  as  each  prediction  was  uttered,  reason  continued  its 
habitual  efforts  to  penetrate  the  unknown;  and  exhibit 
the  important  fact,  that,  while  they  were  subject  to  the 
Divine  influence,  there  was  carried  on  simultaneously, 
a  parallel  exercise  of  the  natural  faculties  of  the  human 
agent,  who  was  thus  employed  to  express  the  revelations 
of  God  in  the  language  of  men."  (P.  213.)  Again : 
"  The  continued  exercise  of  each  prophet's  conscious- 
ness was  preserved  unimpaired,  and  his  understanding 
still  reflected  upon  the  visions  which  his  spiritual  sense 
had  contemplated,  even  while  his  imagination  was 
engaged  in  embodying  them  in  certain  forms  or  sym- 
bols." (P.  218.)  If  such  deliverances  as  these  do  not 
fully  enlighten  and  satisfy  the  reader  as  to  how  it  was 
that  the  "human  element"  became  an  amalgamated 
and  integral  part  of  Scripture,  and  how  it  happened  to 
be  after  the  revelations  of  God  were  made  to  them, 
that  the  prophets  devised,  or  selected,  suitable  words, 
forms,  or  symbols,  by  which  to  represent  them,  one 
may  well  despair  of  satisfying  him  from  the  pages  of 
the  author,  and  leave  him  to  wonder  that  a  Christian 
scholar  and  believer  in  the  plenary  inspiration  and  in- 

10 


218  THE  PLENAKY  INSPIKATTON 

fallibility  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  as  the  Word  of  God, 
should  be  entranced  by  a  theory  which  can  neither  be 
defined  nor  explained  intelligibly. 

IV.  His  illustrationg  from  the  Fathers — from  trances,  ecstasies,  etc. — 
what  he  ascribes  to  the  Divine  and  what  to  human  agency. 

To  sustain  his  view  of  inspiration,  the  author  avails 
himself  of  certain  "allusions,  by  the  Fathers  of  the 
Church,  to  the  effect  of  the  Divine  influence  upon  the 
intellectual  faculties  of  the  prophets  ;"  with  what  success 
the  reader  may  judge.  "  The  primitive  Church  did 
not  shrink  from  expressing  a  decided  opinion  as  to  the 
effect  produced  upon  the  sacred  penmen  while  actuated 
by  the  Spirit's  influence — an  opinion  clearly  indicated 
by  the  series  of  similitudes  which  the  different  writers 
employed  who  approached  the  subject  of  inspiration, 
and  which  were  admirably  calculated,  had  there  been 
occasion  to  develop  them,  to  illustrate  that  mutual 
cooperation  of  the  Divine  and  human  agencies,  which, 
as  we  have  seen,  forms  the  first  condition  of  our  pro- 
blem. The  language  made  use  of  plainly  denotes  that 
the  human  element  was  not  thought  to  have  been  sup- 
pressed or  suspended,  but  to  have  been  filled  and 
exalted  by  the  Divine  illumination  ;  and  to  this  notion 
belongs  that  entire  system  of  illustration  so  familiar  to 
the  Fathers  from  the  earliest  times. 

"  They  compared  the  soul  of  the  man  of  God,  when 
subjected  to  the  Divine  influence,  to  an  instrument  of 
music  into  which  the  Holy  Spirit  breathes,  or  the  strings 
of  which  He  sways,  like  the  plectrum  of  a  harp  or 
lyre,  in  order  to  evoke  its  vital  tones.  Such  illustrations 
were  obviously  suggested  by  the  very  etymology  of 


OF  THE  HOLY   SCKIPTUKES.  219 

the  word  Inspiration — or  as  St.  Paul  terms  it,  Thcop- 
neustia;  and  when  they  are  applied  to  men,  as  the 
agents  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  we  should  remember  that 
the  tone  and  quality  of  the  note  depend  as  much  upon 
the  instrument  itself,  as  upon  the  hand  which  sweeps 
over  its  strings.  And  carrying  out  the  analogy,  we 
can  easily  see,  when  we  reflect  upon  the  full  and  deep 
harmonies  of  Scripture,  how  much  of  their  power  and 
beauty  lies  in  the  Divine  union  of  the  different  human 
instruments  through  which  we  listen  to  the  breathings 
of  the  Spirit.  Thus,  Origen,  speaking  of  the  consist- 
ency of  the  various  parts  of  Scripture,  finely  observed : 
'  Scripture' — what  an  illustration !  Is  Scripture  itself 
the  soul  of  man — the  human  instrument  ?  '  Scripture, 
as  a  whole,  is  God's  one,  perfect,  and  complete  instru- 
ment; giving  forth  to  those  who  wish  to  learn  its  one 
saving  music  from  many  notes  combined  ;  stilling  and 
restraining  all  strivings  of  the  evil  one,  as  David's 
music  calmed  the  madness  of  Saul.'  (Pp.  79,  80.) 

What  the  Divine  union  of  the  different  human  instru- 
ments in  inspiration  may  be,  we  do  not  comprehend, 
nor  how  the  power  and  beauty  of  the  harmonies  of 
Scripture  depend  on  it ;  nor  how  Scripture  itself  can 
be  an  instrument  of  its  own  inspiration.  But  the  anal- 
ogies on  which  the  Fathers  founded  their  comparisons 
of  the  prophets,  as  recipients  of  Divine  communications, 
to  musical  instruments  subjected  to  physical  and  me- 
chanical impulses,  we  clearly  understand  to  be  conclu- 
sive against  the  theory  of  the  author.  Had  they  been 
cited  in  support  of  that  "mechanical'1  theory,  which 
modern  criticism  rejects,  they  would  have  been  apposite, 
forcible,  and  consistent.  Musical  instruments  are,  in 


220  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

themselves,  perfectly  passive.  The  impulses  exerted  on 
them,  whether  tactile  or  aerial,  proceed  wholly  from 
the  action  of  an  external  agent.  So  the  Fathers  con^ 
ceived  that  the  prophets,  in  receiving  the  Divine 
thoughts  by  inspiration,  were  perfectly  passive;  and 
that  the  thoughts  so  received,  were  breathed,  conveyed, 
inspired  into  their  minds  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  If  their 
expressions  imply  any  thing  more  than  this,  they  im- 
ply nothing  contrary  to  it,  or  inconsistent  with  it.  To 
breathe  into  an  instrument,  is  to  impel  air  into  it.  To 
sway  the  strings  of  a  harp,  is  to  exert  an  impulse, 
equivalent,  in  its  nature,  purpose,  and  effect,  to  the 
impulse  of  air  in  the  other  case.  In  both  cases  the 
impulse,  the  power,  the  conveyance,  is  wholly  from 
without.  So  inspiration  is  the  act  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
breathing,  conveying,  inspiring  thoughts  into  the  pass- 
ive mind  of  the  prophet,  to  be  passively  received,  in- 
tellectually conceived,  realized  to  his  intelligent  con- 
sciousness, and,  being  so  received,  to  be  evoked,  uttered, 
recorded,  by  him  in  the  exercise  of  his  own  distinct 
personal  agency. 

To  construe  these  similitudes,  as  delivered  by  the 
Fathers,  so  as  to  make  them  support  the  "dynamical" 
theory  of  inspiration,  it  is  necessary  to  fancy  other 
analogies,  and,  finally,  to  run  the  comparison  aground, 
out  of,  and  beyond,  the  province  of  inspiration,  in  the 
perfected  "organism  of  Holy  Scripture."  The  "dy- 
namical "  theory  is  a  theory,  not  of  the  inspiration  of 
thoughts  into  the  mind,  but  of  influence  on  the  faculties 
of  the  prophets.  An  analogy  is,  therefore,  imagined 
between  those  faculties  and  the  strings  of  a  musical 
instrument,  and  the  comparison  is  based  on  the  as- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  221 

sumption  that  the  '  intellectual  faculties  of  the  prophets 
needed  to  be  excited  and  enlightened  for  the  same 
reason  that  the  strings  of  the  instrument  needed  to  be 
moved  by  tactile  impulse,  "  in  order  to  evoke  their  vital 
tones."  But  this  implies  that  the  evoked  tones  preex- 
isted in  the  strings,  and  owed  not  their  existence  in 
any  sense  or  degree  to  the  impelling  power,  but  only 
their  evocation.  And,  reasoning  from  this  to  inspira- 
tion, it  implies  that  the  truths  recorded  by  the  sacred 
writers  preexisted  in  their  minds,  and  owed  not  their 
existence,  in  any  sense  or  decree,  to  the  Divine  in- 

/  «/  G 

fluence  on  their  faculties,  but  owed  to  that  influence 
only  the  evocation  of  the  truths  out  of  the  depths  of 
their  illuminated  and  guided  faculties.'  This,  un- 
doubtedly, is  what  the  "dynamical  "  theory  necessarily 
comes  to ;  and  it  is  essentially  the  theory  of  the  pagan- 
izing heretics  whom  the  Fathers  opposed  ;  but  it  is  not 
their  theory  in  whole  or  in  part ;  nor  a  theory  on  which 
the  "great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  can  be  maintained." 

In  his  endeavors  to  show  what  the  human  element, 
as  combined  with  the  actuating  influence  of  the  Spirit 
in  inspiration,  actually  did,  he  says,  in  his  remarks  on 
revelations  in  dreams  and  visions.  (P.  172.)  "  The 
trance  of  St.  Peter  .  .  .  affords  a  complete  proof  of 
how  the  natural  condition  and  circumstances  of  the 
person  who  received  this  species  of  revelation,  were 
employed  by  the  Almighty  to  furnish  the  form  under 
which  His  communications  were  conveyed.  St.  Peter, 
we  are  told,  '  went  up  upon  the  house-top  to  pray, 
about  the  sixth  hour :  and  he  became  very  hungry  and 
would  have  eaten  ;  but  while  they  made  ready,  he  fell 


222  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

into  a  trance.'  Now,  what  happened  ?  Why,  he  saw 
a  symbolic  representation  of  certain  truths  which  were 
to  be  distinctly  and  effectually  conveyed  to  his  mind,  and 
heard  an  audible  expression  and  explanation  of  them 
in  words:  "There  came  a  voice  to  him,  Eise,  Peter 
kill  and  eat.  But  Peter  said :  Not  so,  Lord  ;  for  I  have 
never  eaten  any  thing  that  is  common  or  unclean.  And 
the  voice  spake  unto  him  again  the  second  time :  What 
God  hath  cleansed,  that  call  not  thou  common."  This 
was  the  interpretation  of  the  symbol.  As  it  was  un- 
lawful for  him  as  a  Jew  to  eat  common  or  unclean 
meats,  so  it  was  unlawful  to  keep  company  or  come 
into  one  of  another  nation.  The  symbol  signified  that 
God  had  abrogated  that  law.  So  the  voice  explained 
it.  And  "  while  Peter  thought  on  the  vision,  the  Spirit 
said  unto  him,  Behold,  three  men  seek  thee.  Arise, 
therefore,  and  get  thee  down,  and  go  with  them,  doubt- 
ing nothing:  for  I  have  sent  them.'1'1  Accordingly,  with 
this  clear  understanding  of  the  symbol,  the  interpreta- 
tion by  the  voice  of  the  Lord,  and  the  verbal  di- 
rections of  the  Spirit,  he  went,  and,  addressing  Cor- 
nelius and  his  Gentile  kinsmen,  said :  "  God  hath 
showed  me  that  I  should  not  call  any  man  common 
or  unclean."  (Acts  10.)  This  momentous  revelation, 
so  difficult  to  be  received  by  a  scrupulous  Jew,  so 
difficult  to  be  conveyed  and  realized  to  his  intelligent 
consciousness,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  revolutionize  his 
sentiments  and  control  his  future  conduct,  behooved  to 
be  communicated  both  in  words  and  in  signs  of  equiva- 
lent significance  :  and  all  that  constituted  or  was  con- 
tained in  the  revelation,  was  so  communicated.  But, 
says  our  author :  *  The  natural  condition  and  circum- 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  223 

stances  of  Peter,  at  the  time,  supplied  the  form  of  the 
symbolic  representation  in  which  the  revelation  was 
embodied.'  That  is,  Peter  was  on  a  house-top  —  he 
was  praying — he  was  hungry — he  was  in  a  trance, 
which,  separately  or  together,  make  up  what  the 
author  means  by  his  natural  condition.  But  why 
should  this  condition  supply  the  form  of  a  symbol  con- 
sisting of  meats  unlawful  and  unnatural  to  him,  and 
which,  sooner  than  taste  them,  he  would  have  per- 
ished of  hunger  ?  If  his  hunger  was  a  reason  for  a 
symbol  consisting  of  animals,  one  would  think  they 
should  have  been  such  as  he  was  accustomed  to  appro- 
priate as  food.  But  suppose  there  was  a  coincidence 
between  his  sensations,  at  the  time,  and  the  nature  of 
the  symbol,  what  can  that  possibly  have  to  do  with 
the  revelation,  the  specific  truths  signified  by  the  sign, 
and  expressly  declared  in  words  ?  Was  it  not  reason 
enough  why  animals  prohibited  by  the  ritual  law 
should  be  selected  to  teach  him  symbolically  that  the 
law  against  unclean  meats  and  against  intercourse  with 
Grentiles,  was  abolished  ?  Those  truths,  and  those  only, 
were  revealed  and  taught  by  the  symbol,  as  interpreted 
by  the  voice  of  God,  and  as  understood  and  rehearsed 
by  Peter.  If  his  hunger  prescribed  or  modified  the 
form  of  the  symbol,  it  prescribed  or  modified  the 
truths  signified  and  vocally  expressed ;  and  we  may  go 
back  to  what  caused  or  modified  his  hunger,  and  still 
back,  step  by  step,  and  never  get  at  the  bottom  of  the 
combinations  in  "  dynamical  "  inspiration. 

Pursuing  this  theme,  he  ascribes  to  the  imagination 
of  the  prophets  when  excited  to  a  state  of  ecstasy,  the 
creation  or  fancying  of  the  agents,  acts,  and  scenery  of 


224:  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

their  symbolic  visions.  "Assuming  that  certain  imme- 
diate suggestions  have  been  conveyed  to  the  soul  of  the 
prophet,  we  have  to  consider  in  what  manner  they  were 
received  and  appropriated  by  him,  in  his  state  of 
trance  or  ecstasy" — the  state,  namely,  when  "  the 
sense  of  spiritual  intuition  is  called  into  action  by 
means  of  the  new  life  poured  into  the  soul.  Hence 
visions  are  the  result  of  ecstasy.  Now,  as  it  is  only  by 
the  creation  of  new  ideas  and  conceptions  in  the  mind, 
that  the  mysteries  of  God,  and  revelations  of  things 
unseen,  can,  in  most  instances,  be  conveyed  to  the  soul 
still  fettered  by  its  bodily  organization,  such  ideas 
and  conceptions  must  receive  a  certain  clothing — as- 
sume certain  forms — be  embodied,  as  it  were,  in  certain 
shapes — before  they  can  be  apprehended  by  an  under- 
standing limited  to  the  experience  of  this  life  of  ours. 
If  this  be  not  effected,  such  revelation,  at  the  utmost, 
must  be  confined  to  the  individual  who  received  it; 
for,  were  he  even  enabled,  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  to  comprehend  disclosures  thus  transcend- 
ing the  powers  of  human  thought,  and  the  range  of 
human  experience — human  language  would  obviously 
be  incapable  of  conveying  any  representation  of  those 
ideas  to  others.  .  .  .  But  if  it  were  designed  that  the 
revelation  should  be  communicated  to  others,  the  ideas 
by  which  it  was  conveyed  to  the  prophet's  mind,  must 
be  there  invested  with  certain  forms,  supplied  by  such  in- 
tellectual powers  as  now  possess  activity.  In  dreams  and 
ecstasy,  imagination  alone  is  active ;  and  the  forms  or 
symbols  created  by  this  faculty,  acting  according  to  its 
natural  laws,  are  presented  to  the  spiritual  vision  of 
the  prophet,  to  be  gazed  at  as  an  object  of  thought ; 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  225 

although,  previously,  the  original  of  such  symbols  had 
been  but  the  subject  of  thought — or,  in  other  words, 
mere  ideas  or  conceptions.  The  nature  of  the  case,  of 
necessity,  imposes  the  several  steps  of  the  process 
which  has  here  been  described ;  and  in  it  we  can  trace 
the  source  of  that  human  coloring,  by  means  of  which 
the  prophets  have  been  able  to  render  intelligible  to 
their  fellow-men  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom  of  God 
— so  far,  at  least,  as  God  has  been  pleased  to  reveal 
them.  To  this  origin,  therefore,  we  are  to  ascribe  sym- 
bolic actions  and  symbolic  visions.  The  peculiarity  of 
the  former — symbolic  actions — consists  in  this,  that  the 
prophet's  own  personality  is  so  mingled  with  the  objects 
which  are  presented  to  his  spiritual  gaze,  that  he  takes 
an  active  part  in  the  drama,  representing  one  or  other 
of  the  parties  engaged  in  all  such  intuitions — Jehovah 
or  the  people.  The  symbolic  action,  however,  was  no 
more  intended  to  facilitate  the  understanding  of  the 
revelation,  than  were  the  parables  of  the  ISTew  Testa- 
ment to  elucidate  the  sense  of  the  doctrines  which  they 
convey.  [ !  ]  Symbolic  visions  differ  from  symbolic 
actions  merely  in  this,  that  the  prophet  is  no  longer  the 
actor  in  the  scenes  which  he  describes ;  he  now  regards 
them  simply  as  a  spectator.  .  .  .  When  the  ideas, 
divinely  infused  into  the  prophet's  mind,  related  to 
things  which  surpass  the  bounds  of  human  experience, 
it  is  plain,  as  I  have  observed,  that  ordinary  language 
must  fail  to  convey  to  others  what  was  thus  revealed. 
It  was  necessary,  therefore,  that  such  representations  or 
symbols  should  be  moulded,  as  it  were,  for  the  occa- 
sion, which  would  best  conform  to  those  ideas.  In  this 
case  we  may  regard  the  imagination  as  productive.  .  .  . 

10* 


226  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

But  there  were  occasions  on  which  the  ideas  supplied 
to  the  prophet's  mind  were  in  some  measure  related  to 
the  world  of  sense  ;  and  here  the  symbol  corresponds  to 
the  form  which  such  ideas  had  actually  represented.  In 
this  case  the  imagination  may  be  regarded  as  reproduc- 
tive." (Pp.  173-176.) 

This  is  by  far  the  most  ample  and  most  practical 
elucidation  of  '  Dynamical '  Inspiration,  that  is  to  be 
found  in  these  discourses.  It  brings  the  human 
element  out  in  bold  relief,  and  furnishes  materials  for 
trying  the  '  dynamical '  theory  by  its  own  jury  and  its 
own  witnesses.  It  shows  what  a  single  faculty  of  the 
mind  can  do  by  way  of  inspiration  and  revelation, 
when,  in  a  state  of  ecstasy,  the  understanding  and  all  the 
other  faculties  were  in  repose,  and  the  imagination  alone 
active.  Its  psychological  and  physiological  accuracy  we 
leave  to  the  judgment  of  the  reader ;  and  shall  only 
endeavor  to  exhibit  some  glimpses  of  its  consistency 
with  the  author's  theory  of  inspiration,  and  of  its  incon- 
sistency with  the  Divine  origin,  authority,  and  infalli- 
bility of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

In  order  to  render  more  clear  what  the  author  affirms 
of  the  actors  and  their  modes  of  agency,  in  conveying 
reve]ations,  and  bringing  them  within  the  comprehen- 
sion of  the  human  mind,  it  will  be  convenient  to  con- 
sider separately  what  he  ascribes  to  the  Divine  and  what 
he  ascribes  to  the  human  element. 

1.  He  ascribes  to  the  Divine  agency  the  pouring  of  a 
new  life  into  the  soul  of  the  prophet,  raising  it  to  a  state 
of  ecstasy,  and  calling  into  action  his  "  sense,"  or  power 
of  spiritual  intuition,  and  so  producing  visions.  Of 
this  operation  we  apprehend  that  the  Scriptures  are  en- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  227 

tirely  silent ;  and  we  perceive  no  room,  thus  far,  for 
a  combination  of  the  two  elements,  unless  it  was  in  the 
act  of  spiritual  intuition. 

2.  He  ascribes  to  the  Divine  agency  'the  creation  of 
new  ideas  and  conceptions  in  the   prophet's   mind,' 
which  he  also  describes  as  'ideas  divinely  infused.' 
What  he  means  by  'ideas'  is  not  perfectly  clear.     If 
they  were   the    'phantasms'  of  the   early  and  later 
schools  of  philosophy,  then  they  must  have  been  ob- 
jective to  the  intellect — immediate  objects  of  thought, 
and  within  the  scope  and  comprehension  of  the  under- 
standing ;  and  so  also,  had  they  been  thoughts  or  intel- 
lectual conceptions  of  distinct   thoughts.      But   they 
were   neither;  for  all  the  mental  faculties  were  sup- 
pressed and  dormant,  when  the  'ideas'  were  created 
or  infused,  except  the  imagination ;  and  if  they  had 
not  been  suppressed,  '  such  ideas  and  conceptions  could 
not  be  apprehended  by  the  understanding,  till  they  had 
been  clothed,  invested,  embodied  in  certain  forms  or 
shapes,'  namely,  the  symbolic  forms,  shapes,  and  dra- 
peries supplied  by  the  imagination  of  the  prophet,  and 
created  by  that  faculty,  acting  according  to  its  natural 
laws,  and  presented  to  the  spiritual  vision  of  the  pro- 
phet to  be  gazed  at  as  objects  of  thought.     Moreover,  if 
those   'ideas'  had  been  apprehended   by  the  under- 
standing, human  language  was  incompetent  to  express 
or  convey  any  representation  of  them.     It  was  neces- 
sary before  they  could  be  intellectually  conceived,  un- 
derstood, or  apprehended  by  the  prophet,  that  he  should, 
by  an  effort  of  his   imagination  according  to  its  na- 
tural laws,  create  such  symbolic  forms  or  scenes  as 
would  best  conform  to  those  ideas  and  represent  them, 


228  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

and  that  lie  should  present  the  symbols  to  his  own 
spiritual  vision,  that  he  might  by  their  instrumentality 
intuitively  apprehend  the  ideas.  It  must  have  been  a 
laborious  and  difficult  operation  for  the  prophet,  cramped 
and  all  but  stifled  as  he  must  have  been,  in  such  a  state 
of  ecstasy,  to  create  symbols  to  represent  and  render  in- 
telligible, ideas  infused  into  his  mind  without  notice, 
and  without  his  consent,  and  of  such  a  nature  that  he 
could  not  apprehend  them,  nor  be  conscious  of  them. 
It  is  a  wonder  that  in  so  peculiar  a  state,  with  all  the 
avenues  of  light  closed  up,  except  his  imagination,  and 
a  necessity  imposed  on  that  faculty  of  being  exercised 
according  to  its  natural  laws,  no  one  of  the  prophets 
made  the  slightest  mistake  in  his  creation  of  forms  and 
draperies  to  represent  his  infused,  unapprehended,  and 
incomprehensible  ideas.  And  it  can  not  but  strike  one 
as  remarkable,  that  the  Omniscient  Being  who  intended 
to  convey  a  revelation  to  the  finite  creature,  should  not, 
when  He  infused  the  ideas,  infuse  also  such  symbols 
and  such  words  as  should  represent  and  signify  them, 
or  at  least  give  some  clue  to  their  import.  And  there 
is,  no  doubt,  a  degree  of  mystery  which  the  author  has 
overlooked,  or  at  least,  left  unsolved,  in  the  incidental 
circumstance,  that  'the  symbols  or  symbolic  actions 
were  not  intended  to  facilitate  the  understanding  of  the 
revelation.'  Probably  the  revelation  was  not  contained 
in  the  'infused  ideas,'  nor  in  the  imaginary  forms, 
shapes,  draperies,  created  by  the  fancy  of  the  prophet, 
but  in  the  'spiritual  intuitions'  which  he  had  while 
gazing  at  the  forms  and  scenes  of  his  own  creation.  If 
this  is  a  true  notion  of  the  process,  it  may  help  to  ac- 
count for  the  circumstance  that  in  committing  those 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  229 

intuitions  to  writing,  he  invariably  describes  the  sym- 
bolic forms,  agents,  acts,  etc.,  in  literal  and  intelligible 
language,  so  that  interpreters  in  after-ages  might  have 
the  advantage  of  his  creations,  without  being  themselves 
rapt  into  a  state  of  prophetic  ecstasy.  Still  there 
would  be  a  difficulty,  if  the  symbols  were  not  intended, 
to  facilitate  the  understanding  of  the  revelations.  Why 
in  that  case,  should  they  be  described  in  writing  and 
constitute  so  remarkable  a  feature  of  the  prophetic  Scrip- 
tures ?  The  answer  to  this  must  be  that  they  were  in- 
tended to  be  the  basis  of  the  unecstatic  spiritual  intui- 
tions of  modern  interpreters  and  critics. 

But  there  is  yet,  seemingly,  at  least,  another  diffi- 
culty. In  the  sacred  writings  a  good  many  of  the 
symbols  are  expressly  interpreted,  just  as  though  the 
revelation  was  in  fact  conveyed  in  the  symbol.  The 
inspired  interpretation  is  but  an  expression  in  words  of 
what  the  symbol  distinctively  represents.  Thus  the 
symbol  described  in  Peter's  vision  clearly  indicated 
that  the  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  meats 
was  abolished.  That  was  what  he  inferred  and  under- 
stood from  it ;  and  that  was  the  interpetation  announced 
by  a  voice  from  heaven.  So,  of  those  S3Tmbols  which 
were  exhibited  to  Ezekiel,  Daniel,  and  John,  which 
needed  then  to  be  interpreted,  the  interpretation  as 
given  and  recorded  in  the  literal  phrase  of  ordinary 
language,  corresponded  exactly  to  the  truths  indicated 
by  the  natures,  conditions,  characteristics,  agencies,  acts, 
effects,  etc.,  of  the  animate  or  inanimate  constituents  of 
the  symbols.  This  would  seem  to  imply  that  primarily 
the  revelations  were  conveyed  in  the  symbols,  instead 
of  being  conveyed,  as  in  ordinary  cases,  in  words ;  and 


230  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

that  would  seem  to  imply  that  the  symbols  themselves 
were  '  created,'  not  by  the  prophet's  imagination,  but  by 
the  Omniscient  Revealer.  And  some  who  never  heard 
of,  or,  at  least,  who  never  properly  understood  the 
1  dynamical '  theory  of  inspiration,  and  its  auxiliary 
distinction  between  revelation  and  inspiration,  and  the 
combination  of  the  Divine  and  human  agencies  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures — yield  to  this  view  of  the  matter,  and 
fortify  themselves  by  the  consideration  that  the  objects 
which  are  employed  as  symbols,  are  in  all  cases  of  dif- 
ferent natures,  conditions,  characteristics,  relations,  etc., 
from  those  which  they  symbolically  represent,  while 
they  as  invariably  present  certain  points  of  analogy  or 
resemblance,  which,  under  the  circumstances  and  in 
the  historical  connections  in  which  they  were  exhibited, 
indicated  the  truths  intended  to  be  foreshown.  Those 
who  take  this  quasi-1' mechanical'  view,  and  thereby  'ig- 
nore the  human  element,'  will  be  very  likely  to  insist 
that  the  prophets,  had  they  in  paroxysms  of  ecstasy, 
created  the  symbols,  would  have  selected  objects  of  the 
same  natures,  conditions,  etc.,  with  those  intended  to 
be  symbolically  represented.  But  this  objection  is 
overruled  and  obviated  by  that  latent  provision  of  the 
'  dynamical '  theory  which  teaches  that  the  symbols 
were  not  intended  to  facilitate  the  understanding  of  the 
revelations — they  were  intended  only  to  assist  the  spirit- 
ual intuitions  of  the  prophets.  This  will  be  rendered 
still  more  evident  by  a  consideration  of  what  our  author 
ascribes  to  the  human  element  or  the  manner  in  which 
the  revelations  were  received  and  appropriated  by  the 
prophets  in  their  state  of  ecstasy. 

1.  Their  prophetic  visions  resulted  from,  originated 


OF   THE  HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  231 

in,  were  the  product  of,  their  ecstatic  state  of  mind 
when  their  imaginations  alone  were  unsuppressed  and 
in  a  state  to  act. 

2.  Certain    'ideas'   having  been   divinely  infused, 
into  their  souls,  in  such  a  way  that  they  could  not  be 
apprehended  by  their  understandings,  and  which  would 
have  remained  unclothed  and  inexpressible,  had  not 
their  agency  been  exerted  at  that  stage  of  the  process. 
They  created  certain  symbolic  forms,  not  to  represent 
the  'ideas,'  but  only  to  clothe,  embody,  and  give  them 
shape,  so  as  to  make  them  objects  of  thought. 

3.  They   presented    these  symbolic   forms    to   their 
spiritual  intuitional  vision  to  be  gazed  at  as  objects  of 
thought. 

4.  '  By  this  process  they  imparted  that  human  color- 
ing, by  means  of  which  the  prophets  were  enabled  to 

render  intelligible  to  their  fellow-men  the  mvsteries  of 

i/ 

the  kingdom  of  God,  so  far,  at  least,  as  Grod  has  been, 
pleased  to  reveal  them.' 

5.  '  In  symbolic  actions  the  prophet's  own  person- 
ality was  so  mingled  with  the  objects  which  were  pre- 
sented to  his  spiritual  gaze,  that  he  took  an  active  part 
in  the  drama,  representing  one  or  other  of  the  parties 
engaged  in  all  such  intuitions — Jehovah  or  the  people.' 

6.  '  In  symbolic  visions  the  prophet  was  no  longer  the 
actor  in  the  scenes  which  he  describes ;  he  now  regards 
them  simply  as  a  spectator.' 

7.  In  moulding  symbols  when  the  infused  'ideas'  re- 
lated to  things  which  surpass  the  bounds  of  human 
experience,  the  prophet's  imagination  was  productive  ; 
when  those  '  ideas '  related  to  the  world  of  sense,  it  was 
reproductive. 


232  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

8.  It  seems  that  in  prophetic  visions,  '  ideas  or  con- 
ceptions '  may  be  conveyed  into  the  mind  of  the  pro- 
phet without  any  vehicle,  or  vesture,  whatever,  by 
which  they  may  be  consciously  received,  apprehended, 
remembered,  and  expressed.     But  this  was  only  pre- 
liminary.   The  infusions  being  but  the  agency  of  one  of 
the  parties  to  inspiration  uncombined  with  the  agency 
of  the  other  party,  is  to  no  purpose  until  the  Prophet 
has,  in  imagination,  created  certain  forms — answerable, 
as  near  as  might  be,  to  the  unperceived  ideas — by  gaz- 
ing at  which  his  sense  of  spiritual  intuition  was  called 
into  action.     We  wish  the  author  had  stated  distinctly, 
at  what  stage  of  their  visions  it  was,  that  the  prophets 
selected   words   whereby   to   express    the   revelations 
which  they  intuitively  perceived,  while  gazing  at  the 
symbolic  forms  which  they  had  created.     It  could  not 
have  been  at  that  stage  when  the  '  ideas  and  concep- 
tions were  infused  into  their  souls ' ;  for  in  that  case 
the  *  ideas '  would  have  been  apprehended  by  their  un- 
derstandings, which  would  imply  that  their  understand- 
ings were  then  active ;  and  would,  also,  imply,  that 
the  creation  of  symbolic  forms  to  embody  the  ideas, 
and  making  those  forms  objects  of  spiritual  intuition, 
was  superfluous.     We  are,  therefore,  left  to  conclude, 
that  it  must  have  been  at  the  stage  of  spiritual  intui- 
tion, while  they  were  gazing  at  those  symbolic  forms. 
And  this  may  account  for  the  fact  that  each  prophet 
selected  such  ordinary  words,  phrases,  and  idioms  as 
were  natural  and  familiar  to  him  ;  since  the  particular 
forms  selected  and  grouped  in  the  symbols  of  the  re- 
spective prophets,  were  those  of  well-known  animals 
and   natural   phenomena,   most   likely  to   strike   the 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  233 

imagination  in  a  state  of  ecstasy.  For  it  is  reasonable 
to  conclude,  that  if  the  imagination,  acting  according 
to  its  natural  laws,  selected  for  symbols,  phenomena 
with  which  the  prophets  were  familiar,  it  would  for 
the  same  reason  select  such  words  and  phrases  as  they 
understood  and  were  in  the  habit  of  using. 

But  let  it  suffice  us  to  know  that  the  '  dynamical '  the- 
ory— which  involves  in  its  very  essence  the  whole  doc- 
trine of  mechanical  forces,  and,  as  applied  to  inspiration, 
whatever  intellectual,  moral,  and  spiritual  forces  may  be 
required — is  competent  to  what  it  undertakes,  and  will 
bear  any  amount  of  criticism  without  loss  or  damage. 

The  ground  fallacy  of  the  author's  theory,  lies  in  his 
assumption  that,  because  the  words  which  the  sacred 
penmen  used  to  express  the  inspired  thoughts,  were 
the  same  which  they,  characterized  and  circumstanced 
as  they  severally  were,  would  have  used,  had  the 
thoughts  been  their  own  and  uninspired,  therefore  they 
must  have  selected  the  words.  This  involves  the  as- 
sumption, that  if  words  had  been  inspired  into  their 
minds  whereby  to  express  the  same  thoughts  in  writ- 
ing, they  would  have  been  different  words  from  those 
which  they  used,  and  that  there  would  have  been  no 
such  diversity  of  styles  and  idioms  as  actually  exists. 
But  this  would  have  defeated  the  object  of  inspiration, 
which  was  to  convey  infallible  truths  in  words  that 
were  understood  by  the  recipient,  so  that  he  might 
correctly  conceive,  be  conscious  of,  and  remember  those 
truths  in  those  words,  and  record  the  words  for  the  in- 
struction of  others. 

That  the  words  actually  employed  were  perfectly 
adapted  to  convey  the  inspired  truths,  is  indubitable  ; 


284  THE   PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

for  the  truths  which  they  actually  convey  are  infalli- 
ble. But  those  infallible  truths  could  not  have  been 
infallibly  or  perfectly  conveyed  to  the  several  penmen, 
in  any  other  than  words,  styles,  phrases,  idioms,  with 
which  they  were  familiar,  and  which  by  their  educa- 
tion, employments,  position,  associations,  temperament, 
genius,  taste,  physical  and  mental  habits  and  circum- 
stances, they  readily  and  correctly  understood.  To 
accomplish  the  purpose  of  infinite  wisdom,  therefore, 
the  Omniscient  Eevealer  inspired  those  words  into  the 
minds  of  the  sacred  writers,  as  the  vehicle  of  the  infal- 
lible truths  which  He  intended  to  convey.  And, 
even  if  it  had  not  been  impossible,  consistently  with 
the  constitution  and  laws  of  the  human  mind,  to  inspire 
thoughts  into  it,  without  the  words  as  their  vehicle 
which  perfectly  expressed  them,  it  would  be  absolutely 
certain,  if  the  thoughts  which  are  contained  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures  were  inspired  of  God,  that  the  words  of 
Scripture,  as  originally  written,  were  inspired  with  the 
truths :  for  in  no  other  words,  styles,  and  idioms  could 
the  truths  conveyed  to  the  respective  writers  have 
been  understood  by  them  or  by  their  cotemporaries. 

And  we  can  not  but  regard  the  author's  endeavors 
to  explain,  how  human  agency  became  combined  with 
the  Divine  agency  in  inspiration,  and  in  revelation  by 
symbols  ;  how  revelations  in  visions  differ  from  reve- 
lations made  directly  ;  how  the  phenomena  of  ordinary 
revelations  differ  from  those  of  prophetic  revelations, 
as  contributing  nothing  towards  a  right  understanding 
of  the  nature  of  that  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Scriptures 
which  is  the  ground  of  their  infallibility,  gives  them 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  235 

authority  as  the  word  of  God,  and  constitutes  them  the 
only  rule  of  human  faith  and  life. 

V.  His  reasons  for  rejecting  the   so-called   '  mechanical '   theory  of 

Inspiration. 

We  proceed  to  examine  the  author's  reasons  for  re- 
jecting the  doctrine  of  verbal  inspiration.  That  doc- 
trine he  characterizes  as  the  mechanical  theory  of  inspira- 
tion. We  quote  his  own  description  of  it :  "It  admits 
and  can  admit  of  no  degrees.  It  puts  forward  one  con- 
sistent and  intelligible  theory,  without  subdivisions  or 
gradations.  According  to  it,  each  particular  doctrine 
or  fact  contained  in  Scripture,  whether  in  all  respects 
naturally  and  necessarily  unknown  to  the  writers,  or 
which,  although  it  might  have  been  ascertained  by 
them  in  the  ordinary  course  of  things,  they  were  not, 
in  point  of  fact,  acquainted  with;  or  in  fine,  every 
thing,  whether  actually  known  to  them,  or  which 
might  become  so,  by  means  of  personal  experience  or 
otherwise — each  and  every  such  point  has  not  only 
been  committed  to  writing  under  the  infallible  assist- 
ance and  guidance  of  God,  but  is  to  be  ascribed  to  the 
special  and  immediate  suggestion,  embreathment,  and 
dictation  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Nor  does  this  hold  true 
merely  with  respect  to  the  sense  of  Scripture,  and  the 
facts  and  sentiments  therein  recorded,  but  each  and 
every  word,  phrase,  and  expression,  as  well  as  the  order 
and  arrangement  of  such  words,  phrases,  and  expres- 
sions, has  been  separately  supplied,  breathed  into  (as  it 
were)  and  dictated  to  the  sacred  writers,  by  the  Spirit 
of  God."  (P.  19.) 

Again  :  'According  to  this  system,  the  Human  ele- 


236  THE   .PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

ment  is  entirely  lost  sight  of.  On  its  principles  the 
sacred  writers,  on  receiving  the  Divine  impulse,  re- 
signed both  mind  and  body  to  God,  who  influenced 
and  guided  both  at  His  sole  pleasure ;  the  human 
agent  contributing,  the  while,  no  more  than  the  pen  of 
the  scribe  :  in  a  word,  he  was  the  pen,  not  the  penman 
of  the  Spirit."  (P.  22.)  As  evidence  that  those  who 
hold  the  '  mechanical '  theory,  teach  this,  he  quotes, 
from  Hooker,  the  following  exposition  of  1  Cor.  2  :  18. 
"Which  things — the  things  which  God  had  revealed  to 
the  Apostles  by  His  Spirit,  verse  10 — also  we  speak,  not 
in  the  words  which  man's  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which 
the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth.  "  This  is  that  which  the 
prophets  mean  by  those  books  written  full  within  and 
without ;  which  books  were  so  often  delivered  them  to 
eat,  not  because  God  fed  them  with  ink  and  paper,  but 
to  teach  us,  that,  so  often  as  He  employed  them  in  this 
heavenly  work,  they  neither  spake  nor  wrote  any  word 
of  their  own,  but  uttered  syllable  by  syllable  as  the 
Spirit  put  it  into  their  mouths."  This  our  author,  of 
course,  rejects,  and  doubtless  would  reject  the  more 
ample  exposition  of  Doctor  Hodge  :  "  The  words  used 
by  the  apostle  were  neither  such  as  the  skill  of  the 
rhetorician  would  suggest,  nor  such  as  his  own  mind, 
uninfluenced  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  suggested.  The 
affirmative  statement  is,  that  the  words  used  were 
taught  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  is  verbal  Inspiration, 
or  the  doctrine  that  the  writers  of  the  Scriptures  were 
controlled  by  the  Spirit  of  God  in  the  choice  of  the 
words  which  they  employed  in  communicating  divine 
truth.  This  has  been  stigmatized  as  the  'mechanical 
theory  of  Inspiration ' ;  degrading  the  sacred  penmen 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  237 

into  mere  machines.  It  is  objected  to  this  doctrine, 
that  it  leaves  the  diversity  of  style  which  marks  the 
different  portions  of  the  Bible,  unaccounted  for.  But 
if  God  can  control  the  thoughts  of  a  man  without  mak- 
ing him  a  machine,  why  can  not  He  control  his  lan- 
guage ?  And  why  may  He  not  render  each  writer, 
whether  poetical  or  prosaic,  whether  polished  or  rude, 
whether  aphoristic  or  logical,  infallible  in  the  use  of 
his  characteristic  style  ?  If  the  language  of  the  Bible 
be  not  inspired,  then  we  have  the  truth  communicated 
through  the  discoloring  and  distorting  medium  of  hu- 
man imperfection.  Paul's  direct  assertion  is  that  the 
words  which  he  used,  were  taught  by  the  Holy  Ghost." 
(Corn,  on  1  Cor.,  p.  41.)  And,  let  us  add — If  the 
Spirit  can  communicate  truths,  facts,  doctrines,  to  the 
human  mind,  by  inspiration,  why  can  He  not  commu- 
nicate them  in  words — the  words  which  perfectly  ex- 
press them,  and  in  which  they  are  to  be  re  uttered,  vo- 
cally or  in  writing  ?  Would  the  communication  of 
them  in  words,  any  more  than  without  words,  make 
the  recipients  machines?  Does  the  conveyance  of 
thoughts  from  one  man  to  another,  in  words,  by  vocal 
utterance,  make  the  hearer  a  machine  ?  Can  one  man 
convey  his  thoughts  to  another,  without  infringing  his 
liberty  or  his  consciousness,  in  a  way  that  the  Omni- 
scient, Almighty  Spirit,  can  not  convey  His  thoughts  ? 
If  the  Spirit  spake  audibly  on  various  occasions  to  pro- 
phets and  apostles,  conveying  His  thoughts  in  His 
words,  can  He  not  convey  His  thoughts  in  words  by 
inspiration  ?  The  conveyance  of  thoughts  in  words  by 
vocal  utterance,  is  in  the  Scriptures  themselves  treated 
as  the  same  thing,  identical,  equivalent,  producing  the 


238  THE   PLENAKY  INSPIRATION 

same  effect,  as  the  conveyance  of  the  same  or  other 
thoughts  by  inspiration.  All  Scripture — that  which 
is  written,  the  words  which  constitute  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures— was  given  by  inspiration.  But  a  very  large 
proportion  of  the  whole  is,  word  for  word,  what  was 
vocally  and  audibly  articulated.  God  at  sundry  times 
and  in  divers  manners  spake  in  time  past  unto  the 
fathers  by  the  prophets.  But  much  of  what  the  pro- 
phets officially  delivered,  they  received  by  inspiration 
in  visions,  dreams,  and  otherwise,  when  there  was  no 
audible  utterance.  "  The  Lord  God  .  .  .  spake  by  the 
mouth  of  His  holy  prophets  which  have  been  since  the 
world  began."  (Luke  1.)  This  must  include  what  was 
spoken  audibly  to  the  outward  ear,  and  what  was 
spoken,  conveyed,  realized  to  the  consciousness,  inter- 
nally by  inspiration ;  the  words  being  included  in  both 
methods.  The  Spirit  spake  by  David.  His  word  was 
on  his  tongue.  This  can  not  refer  to  what  the  Spirit 
audibly  articulated,  to  the  exclusion  of  what  He  con- 
veyed by  inspiration.  "  The  Holy  Ghost  spake  by 
Isaiah  the  prophet  unto  our  fathers,  saying,  Go  unto 
this  people,  and  say,  Hearing,"  etc.  (Acts  28.)  Isaiah 
says  :  "I  heard  the  voice  of  the  Lord  saying  .  .  .  Go 
and  tell  this  people,"  etc.  (Isaiah  6.)  *The  Jews  hard- 
ened their  hearts,  ulest  they  should  hear  the  law  and 
the  words  which  the  Lord  of  hosts  hath  sent  in  His 
Spirit  by  the  former  prophets,"  (Zech.  7 :)  which 
implies  that  the  communications  made  to  the  prophets, 
whether  by  audible  utterances,  or  by  inspiration,  were 
made  in  words. 

The  author's  objections  to  the  l  mechanical '  theory 
of  Inspiration  are : 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  239 

1.  That  it  ascribes  too  little  to  the  Human  element 
of  the  Bible.  He  says  that  it  "  practically  ignores  the 
Human  element  of  the  Bible,  and  fixes  its  exclusive  at- 
tention upon  the  Divine  agency  in  its  composition.1'1 
(P.  18.)  The  confusion  in  his  use  of  terms  vitiates  this 
assertion,  and  renders  it  inapplicable  to  the  '  mechanical ' 
theory,  which  does  not  relate  to  the  composition  of  the 
Bible,  but  to  the  inspiration,  inbreathing,  transference, 
into  the  minds  of  the  writers,  of  the  thoughts  and 
words  of  God,  which  they  inscribed  on  paper.  In 
literature,  a  composition  is  a  writing.  To  compose  a 
book  is  to  write  it.  The  thoughts  and  words  are  the 
same  before  as  after  they  are  written.  They  may  be 
perfectly  uttered  vocally.  They  may  remain  unuttered, 
and  yet  be  intellectually  conceived  as  clearly  and  per- 
fectly as  after  they  have  been  spoken  or  written.  Does 
the  author  mean  then  to  say,  that  the  'mechanical' 
theory  ascribes  the  act  of  writing  to  the  Divine  agency  ? 
Is  that  theory  of  inspiration  a  theory  of  writing  ?  If  so, 
how  does  it  ignore  the  Human  element  upon  which,  in 
his  phrase,  it  fixes  its  exclusive  attention  ? 

If,  instead  of  thus  confounding  inspiration  and  com- 
position, he  had  said  in  plain  terms  :  The  '  mechanical ' 
theory  of  Inspiration  ascribes  the  thoughts  and  words 
of  Scripture  exclusively  to  the  Divine  acts,  and  denies 
that  human  agency  had  any  thing  to  do  in  the  selection 
or  inspiration  either  of  the  thoughts  or  words  contained 
in  the  Bible  ;  and,  therefore,  since  it  denies  the  Human 
element  in  such  selection,  and  fixes  its  exclusive  atten- 
tion on  the  Divine  agency,  I  object  to  it  as  not  to  be 
relied  on  in  a  defense  of  'the  great  doctrine  of  the  in- 
fallibility of  Holy  Scripture,'  he  would  have  made  him- 


240  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

self  understood  consistently  with  his  own  theory.  But 
then  he  should  have  explained  himself,  when,  as  ex- 
pressions of  his  cherished  practical  sentiments  and  feel- 
ings, he  penned  such  sentences  as  the  following :  "  The 
narrative  portion  of  the  Bible,  whether  contained  in 
the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  or  in  the 
Gospels  and  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  is  to  be  looked  upon 
as  stamped  with  the  same  infallible  truth  as  the  account 
of  Christ's  discourses,  or  of  what  are,  strictly  speaking, 
revelations,  or  of  doctrinal  teaching  in  general ; — this 
principle  is  fully  borne  out  by  many  characteristics  of 
the  inspired  record.  That  even  the  form  and  language 
in  which  its  truths  are  expressed,  [as  the  rejected  'me- 
chanical '  theory  affirms,]  bear  the  impress  of  its  Divine 
origin,  no  less  plainly  than  those  truths  themselves,  may 
be  inferred,  with  absolute  certainty,  from  the  nature  of 
the  reasoning  employed  by  our  Lord  and  His  apostles, 
in  which  it  is  invariably  assumed  that  the  words  of 
Scripture  are  no  less  Divine  than  the  doctrines  which 
they  convey."  (P.  366.)  "Holy  Scripture  presents 
the  prophets  to  our  view  as  human  instruments  through 
whom  the  Spirit  of  God  speaks,  and  by  whose  lips  He 
announces  the  Divine  oracles."  (P.  199.) 

2.  He  objects  that  the  'mechanical '  theory  can  not 
stand  the  test  of  modern  criticism.  "  So  long,  indeed," 
he  observes,  "  as  the  '  mechanical '  theory  of  inspiration 
was  generally  maintained,  there  was  no  want  of  dis- 
tinctness or  consistency  in  the  views  put  forward.  So 
long  as  it  was  believed  that  each  word  and  phrase  to 
be  found  in  the  Bible — nay,  even  the  order  and  gram- 
matical connection  of  such  words  and  phrases — had 
been  infused  by  the  Holy  Ghost  into  the  minds  of  the 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  241 

sacred  writers,  or  dictated  to  them  by  His  immediate 
suggestion,  so  long  must  the  opinion  held  respecting 
Inspiration  have  been  clear,  intelligible,  and  accurately 
defined.  But  such  a  theory  could  not  stand  the  test  of 
close  examination.  The  strongest  evidence  against  it 
has  been  supplied  by  the  Bible  itself,  and  each  addi- 
tional discovery  in  the  criticism  of  the  Greek  or  Hebrew 
text  confirms  anew  the  conclusion  that  the  great  doc- 
trine of  the  infallibility  of  Holy  Scripture  can  no  longer 
rely  upon  such  a  principle  for  its  defense."  (Pref.  p.  3.) 
It  is  clear  that  he  understood  the  '  mechanical '  theory 
as  teaching  that  the  great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of 
Holy  Scripture  rests,  absolutely  and  exclusively,  on 
the  fact,  that  all  the  words  and  phrases  of  the  original 
texts,  in  the  order  and  grammatical  connection  in 
which  they  were  written,  were  infused  into  the  minds 
of  the  sacred  writers,  or  immediately  dictated  to  them, 
by  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  he  admits  that  those  who  held 
that  theory  were  consistent,  and  that  their  views  of  in- 
spiration were  clear,  intelligible,  and  accurately  defined. 
But,  though  he  professes  to  believe  that  the  texts  after 
they  were  actually  written — the  words  and  phrases  in 
the  order  and  grammatical  connection  in  which  they 
were  written — are  the  infallible  word  of  God,  he  re- 
jects the  doctrine  as  above  stated,  because  a  certain 
class  of  critics  deny  it.  But  who  are  those  critics  ? 
Are  they  believers  in  the  infallibility  of  Scripture  in 
any  sense  or  on  any  theory  ?  Are  they  believers  in 
any  supernatural  and  infallible  inspiration  whatever  ? 
Not  one  of  them.  They  criticise  the  text — the  words, 
the  phrases — of  Scripture,  not  as  having  been  given  by 
supernatural  inspiration  of  God,  not  as  being  the  words 

11 


242  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

of  God  in  any  sense,  but  as  being  the  fallible,  inadequate, 
uncertain  words  of  man,  employed  to  express  his  im- 
perfect conceptions,  just  as  they  regard  and  criticise 
the  writings  of  Herodotus  and  Homer. 

Unfortunately,  the  author  conceded  what  these  critics 
denied,  and  feeling  called  on  to  show  how  words  fallible 
as  selected  and  used  by  man,  can,  when  he  selects  and 
uses  them  as  an  element  of  Holy  Scripture,  become  the 
infallible  words  of  God — how  the  sacred  writings  can 
consist  of  two  distinct  elements,  a  Divine  and  a  Human 
element,  and  yet  consist  only  of  the  infallible  words  of 
God,  he  adopts  the  theory  that  the  Divine  and  human 
agency  were  combined  in  the  selection  and  collocation 
of  the  words,  and  assumes  that  the  combined  act  made 
that  which  was  human  infallible  and  Divine,  though 
by  his  theory  it  continues  still  to  be  a  distinct  human 
element  of  the  Bible !  He  denies  that  the  words  of 
Scripture  are  the  words  of  God,  because  they  were  se- 
lected exclusively  by  the  Spirit,  and  inspired  into  the 
minds  of  the  sacred  writers,  and  believes  that  they 
were  selected  by  man,  and  actually  constitute  a  human 
element  of  the  text ;  yet  he  believes  that  being  written, 
they  are  the  words  of  God.  Because  the  words  and 
phrases,  and  their  order  and  grammatical  connection, 
are,  as  written  by  the  sacred  penmen,  precisely  what 
he  imagines  they  would  have  been  had  there  been  no 
inspiration  in  the  case,  he  concludes  that  the  penmen 
selected  them,  and  therefore  that  they  constitute  a  dis- 
tinct human  element  of  the  Bible.  Each  one  of  the 
penmen  selected  just  such  peculiar,  literal,  figurative, 
polished,  rude,  common,  or  extraordinary  words, 
phrases,  idioms,  collocations,  as  any  man  of  his  charac- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  243 

ter,  temperament,  habits,  social  position,  etc.,  would 
naturally  have  selected,  and  therefore — such  is  the  as- 
sumption— they  could  not  have  been  inspired  into  his 
mind  with  the  same  peculiarities,  by  the  Holy  Spirit  ; 
and  yet  to  render  them,  diversified  as  they  are,  infalli- 
ble, as  perfectly  expressing  infallible  truth,  it  was 
necessary  that  the  Spirit  should  guide  them  in  the  se- 
lection, and  infallibly  guide  them,  to  choose  those  very 
words  with  all  their  individualizing  peculiarities,  and 
to  reject  all  others.  This  is  the  point  to  which  the 
author's  theory  and  his  reasonings  come.  Infallible 
truths  were  to  be  expressed.  ISTo  other  than  certain 
words,  in  a  certain  order,  and  in  certain  grammatical 
connections,  would  perfectly  express  those  truths.  How 
were  those  precise  words  in  the  necessary  order  and 
connection  supplied  ?  Not,  says  the  author,  by  being 
infused,  inbreathed,  inspired,  into  the  minds  of  the 
writers  with  the  truths,  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  nor  by 
being  dictated  to  them  audibly  or  otherwise,  as  the 
words  necessary  to  be  written  to  express  the  truths ; 
but  by  the  fallible  human  agents  being  infallibly  guided 
to  select  just  the  words  and  collocations  which  were 
necessary. 

We  feel  safe  in  saying,  that  the  author  has  not  ex- 
hibited in  his  volume  a  particle  of  evidence  that  any 
such  guidance  of  the  sacred  writers,  any  such  "actu- 
ating energy,"  on  their  faculties,  took  place  in  any  in- 
stance or  degree.  It  is  but  an  inference  from  his 
theory,  an  assumption  rendered  necessary  by  his  theory 
of  Inspiration  ;  or  rather  it  is  the  essence  of  his  theory 
of  inspiration,  as  expressed  in  his  formal  definition. 
And  if  "  the  great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  Holy 


244  THE   PLENAKY   INSPIRATION 

Scripture,"  depends  upon  this  as  the  alternative  of  the 
'  mechanical '  theory,  it  is  involved,  to  say  the  least,  in 
far  more  embarrassment  and  difficulty,  than  has  been 
imagined  heretofore. 

If  the  supposed  guidance  rendered  the  selection,  and 
the  words  selected,  infallible,  then  it  was  the  same 
thing  as  a  selection  and  inspiration  of  them  by  the 
Spirit,  and  they  were  His  words;  if  it  did  not  render 
them  infallible,  and  they  were  still  man's  words,  a  hu- 
man element  "  incorporated  as  an  integral  part  of  the 
Bible,"  then  the  great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of 
Holy  Scripture,  rests  on  man's  responsibility  in  the 
selection  and  use  of  words.  Nothing  short  of  infallible 
guidance  can  arrest  this  conclusion.  But  infallible 
guidance  implies  either  a  mechanical  direction  of  man's 
faculties,  or  such  a  restraining  and  controlling  influence 
on  them,  as  to  suspend  his  free  agency,  or  else  it  implies 
simply  a  conveyance  by  inspiration  to  the  minds  of 
the  writers,  of  the  words,  as  God's  words,  with  the 
truths  which  He  required  to  be  expressed  in  writing. 

If  the  truths  which  are  recorded  in  Scripture  were 
selected,  prescribed,  and  determined  by  the  Omniscient 
Being,  then  they  were,  in  distinction  from,  and  to  the 
exclusion  of,  other  matter,  conveyed  to  the  minds, 
realized  to  the  intelligent  consciousness  of  the  holy  men 
who  were  officially  employed  to  record  them,  in  such 
a  way  that  they  could  intellectually  conceive  them. 
They  could  not  possibly  know  any  thing  of  them  unless 
they  were  so  conveyed  and  received,  that  they  had  a 
clear  intellectual  conception  of  them.  But  no  man  has 
any  intellectual  conception  of  truths  except  in  words. 
If,  then,  the  sacred  writers,  in  receiving  the  truths 


OF  THE  HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  245 

which  they  were  to  record,  had  the  natural  and  ordi- 
nary use  of  their  faculties  —  as  our  author,  and  all 
others  who  hold  the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God,  main- 
tain— they  must  as  soon  as  they  were  conscious  of  re- 
ceiving those  truths,  have  been  conscious  of  conceiving 
them  in  words.  The  same  Divine  act  which  conveyed 
the  truths  to  their  minds  must  have  conveyed  the 
words,  for  they  could  not  receive,  so  as  to  know  or  be 
conscious  of,  the  truths  without  the  words.  There  is, 
therefore,  just  as  much  ground  for  a  theory  which 
should  assume  that  the  sacred  writers  selected  the 
truths  to  be  recorded,  as  there  is  for  the  theory  which 
assumes  that  they  selected  the  words,  and  the  great 
doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as 
much  with  respect  to  the  doctrines  and  facts  recorded 
as  to  the  words  in  which  they  are  written,  rests  on 
man's  responsibility  in  the  selection. 

Such  further  theory,  in  fact,  the  author  substantially 
advances,  in  stating  "  the  arguments  by  which  the 
'  dynamical '  theory  of  inspiration  may  be  supported. 
Inspiration,  I  must  again  repeat,  must  be  understood 
as  denoting  that  Divine  influence  under  which  all  the 
parts  of  the  Bible  have  been  committed  to  writing — 
whether  they  contain  an  account  of  ordinary  historical 
facts,  or  the  narrative  of  supernatural  revelations.  In 
the  reception  and  utterance  of  such  revelations,  it  is 
admitted  by  all  who  allow  that  any  communication  has 
taken  place  between  earth  and  heaven,  that  the  human 
agent  can  be  regarded  in  no  other  light  than  as  an  in- 
strument in  the  hands  of  God,  by  whose  intervention 
His  counsels  have  been  made  known  to  man,"  [which, 
in  fact,  is  just  what  the  '  mechanical '  theory  teaches.] 

21* 


246  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

"  If  in  any  case,  here  assuredly,  the  strict '  mechanical ' 
theory  of  inspiration  (if  true)  must  hold  good — a  theory 
according  to  which  each  phrase  and  expression  in  the 
Bible  has  been  set  down  by  the  sacred  penmen  at  the 
dictation  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  But  if  the  facts  which 
we  are  about  to  consider  warrant  our  asserting,  that 
even  in  the  reception  of  what  are,  in  the  most  literal 
sense,  revelations,  human  agency  has  had  its  full  scope ; 
and  that  each  prophetic  announcement,  as  recorded  in  the 
pages  of  Scripture,  bears  the  undoubted  stamp  of  the 
genius,  and  mental  culture,  and  circumstances  of  the 
prophet  who  has  given  it  utterance;  we  are  surely 
justified  in  concluding  that,  when  matters  of  history, 
or  drawing  inferences  from  previous  revelations,  the 
same  scope,  at  least,  was  allowed  to  the  individual 
characteristics  of  the  inspired  writers.  The  general 
method  according  to  which  the  Divine  scheme  has  been 
developed,  might,  indeed,  of  itself,  justify  this  conclu- 
sion. We  are  expressly  taught  by  the  whole  tenor  of 
Scripture,  that  the  course  which  God  has  pursued  in 
conveying  His  revelations  to  man,  has  been  always  sin- 
gularly marked  by  the  employment  of  natural  means." 
(P.  148.)  If  in  this  extract,  any  thing  intelligible  is 
signified,  it  is  that  the  agency  of  the  sacred  writers,  in 
the  act  of  receiving  original  revelations,  such  as  prophe- 
cies audibly  announced  by  the  voice  of  God,  had  full 
scope  in  selecting  the  words  in  which  the  announce- 
ments were  made,  or  otherwise  imparting  to  them  their 
own  individual  characteristics.  What  signifies  his 
formal  statement,  (p.  27,)  that  he  understands  by  Kev- 
elation  a  direct  communication  from  God  to  man,  of 
what  was  not  known  to  the  recipient  before,  when  his 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  247 

theory  demands  the  intervention  of  human  agency  to 
determine  the  words  which  the  Omniscient  Revealer 
may  employ  !  What,  but  that  he  holds  a  speculative 
theory,  which  is  totally  opposed  to  his  practical  belief? 

If  Jehovah,  in  announcing  predictions  previously 
known  only  to  Him,  used  His  own  words  to  express 
His  own  thoughts,  then  there  was  no  human  element 
either  in  His  thoughts  or  His  expressions,  and  the 
'  dynamical '  theory  is  false.  If  there  was  a  human 
element  in  such  revelations,  in  the  thoughts  expressed, 
or  in  the  words  selected  and  employed,  then  it  must 
have  been  imparted  by  human  agency  prior  to  the  an- 
nouncement by  the  audible  voice  of  God  ;  the  prophets 
must  have  selected  the  words  prior  to  their  being  ut- 
tered, and  must  have  selected  their  own  words  to  ex- 
press thoughts,  predictions,  then  wholly  unknown  to 
them,  and  must  therefore  have  selected  the  thoughts, 
facts,  events,  to  be  expressed,  announced,  revealed,  in 
their  words  ;  and  must  themselves  have  been  the  prime 
authors  and  revealers  of  the  prophecies.  Instead  of 
being  the  instruments  in  the  hands  of  God,  through 
which  He  conveyed  His  thoughts  in  His  words  to  the 
world,  they  were  in  reality  the  principals. 

That  the  author,  under  the  spell  of  this  '  dynamical ' 
theory,  intended  to  affirm  in  relation  to  original  revela- 
tions, all  that  he  meant  by  'the  Human  element'  as 
an  integral  part  of  Holy  Scripture — '  the  combination  of 
Divine  and  Human  agency,'  '  inspiration,'  the  reason  of 
the  diversified  styles,  idioms,  etc.,  is  manifest  from  what 
follows.  For  the  most  part,  however,  he  uses  terms  in 
such  inconsistent  senses,  as  his  speculative,  or  his 
practical,  theory  predominates,  that  it  is  difficult, 


24:8  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

within  reasonable  limits,  to  exhibit  distinctly,  either 
class  of  his  opinions.  At  page  167,  he  says:  "We 
must  ever  keep  in  mind,  that  the  internal  suggestion 
which  prompts  his  utterance,  neither  proceeds  from, 
nor  is  produced  by,  the  prophet's  natural  powers,  or 
personal  condition ;  it  is  a  new  principle  which  is  in- 
fused into  his  soul,  with  an  energy  transcending  all  that 
is  human.  This  fact  is  completely  established  by  the 
uniformity  with  which  the  prophets  themselves  point 
out  one  characteristic  of  every  species  of  Divine  Revela- 
tion. They  invariably  represent  their  knowledge  as 
proceeding  from  an  immediate  intuition.  Such  is  the 
obvious  sense  of  the  constant  expressions,  'seer,' 
*  vision.'  All  revelations  were  '  seen,'  or  '  gazed  upon,'  and 
were  therefore  apprehended  by  the  inward  intelligence 
instantaneously,  and  in  a  manner  analogous  to  the  re- 
ception of  impressions  by  the  outward  senses."  This 
is  a  fair  specimen  of  his  philosophical  and  critical  ac- 
curacy in  the  use  of  language.  All  revelations  were 
seen,  apprehended,  by  the  inward  intelligence,  by  im- 
mediate instantaneous  intuition,  and  the  prophets  were 
prompted  to  utter  them  by  a  new  principle  which  was 
infused  into  their  souls.  No  revelations  then  were  ori- 
ginally made  to  the  patriarchs,  Moses,  the  children  of 
Israel,  or  the  prophets,  in  words.  The  articulate 
audible  voice  of  God,  speaking  to  them,  added  nothing 
to  the  knowledge  which  they  previously  had  by  imme- 
diate intuition.  Had  all  that  they  knew  of  the  things 
revealed  been  expressed  and  conveyed  in  the  audible 
words  of  God,  then  the  task  of  selecting  the  words,  and 
introducing  the  '  Human  element,'  by  combining  their 
agency  with  His,  would  have  been  uncalled  for,  and 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  249 

the  diversities  of  style  in  the  infallible  text  could  not 
abide  the  test  of  rationalistic  criticism.  What  that  new 
suggestive  principle  was,  that  was  infused  into  their 
souls,  and  prompted  them  to  utter,  orally  or  in  writing, 
the  knowledge  which  they  had  by  immediate  intuition, 
we  know  not,  unless  it  was  what  Mr.  Morell  defines  as 
"that  act  of  Divine  power  by  which  God  presents  the 
realities  of  the  spiritual  world  immediately  to  the  human 
mind."  (Philosophy  of  Religion,  p.  150.)  If  that  was 
it,  then,  having  plenary  knowledge,  the  prophets  would 
know  by  immediate  intuition,  what  was,  from  time  to 
time,  to  be  revealed  by  audible  utterance  in  words,  and 
could  supply  the  human  element  by  selecting  the 
words  beforehand.  "Why  they  should  on  this  suppo- 
sition have  prescribed  such  different  styles  and  idioms, 
must  remain  a  mystery. 

It  is  a  gross  misrepresentation  to  say  that  the  sense 
of  the  terms  '  seer '  and  '  vision,'  as  used  in  Scripture 
is  the  same  as  '  immediate  intuition.'  There  are  but 
two  Hebrew  words,  which  as  verbs  are  rendered  in  our 
version,  by  our  verb  to  see.  That  verb  in  its  different 
forms  is  used  to  express  all  kinds  of  sensations  and  in- 
tellectual perceptions.  Often  it  imports  the  same  as 
the  verbs  to  hear,  to  know,  to  understand.  Thus  the 
children  of  Israel  "  saw  the  thunderings  .  .  .  and  the 
noise  of  the  trumpet."  (Exod.  20.)  The  prophets 
saw  visions :  that  is,  they  heard  words,  or  had  intel- 
lectual conceptions  and  consciousness  of  thoughts  in- 
spired into  their  minds  in  words,  which  they  immedi- 
ately proceeded  to  write.  Thus :  "  The  vision  of 
Isaiah  which  he  saw — Hear,  0  heavens  !  "  etc.  "The 
vision  of  Obadiah — Thus  saith  the  Lord."  "  The  burden 

11* 


250  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

which  Habakuk  the  prophet  did  see"  "  The  words  of 
Amos  which  he  saw  concerning  Israel."  They  saw 
nothing  of  the  nature  of  revelations  by  immediate  in- 
tuition. The  knowledge  conveyed  to  their  minds  in 
visions,  dreams,  trances,  was  conveyed  in  the  words 
which  they  spoke  and  wrote. 

One  of  the  Hebrew  words  referred  to  is,  as  a  noun, 
and  the  other  as  a  participle,  translated  'seer,'  an  epithet 
generally  employed  as  synonymous  with  '  prophet ' — 
one  who  saw  visions,  or  received  revelations  in  visions — 
as  Samuel,  Nathan,  David's  '  seer,'  and  others.  It  first 
occurs  in  1  Samuel  9  :  9,  where  it  is  said:  "He  that  is 
now  called  a  prophet  was  beforetime  called  a  '  seer.' 
There  is  no  application  of  it  that  indicates  a  power  of 
perceiving  or  knowing  prophetic  or  other  revelations 
by  immediate  intuition. 

It  would  be  useless  to  pursue  this  class  of  objections 
any  further.  The  critics  who  originate  them,  assume 
that  if  the  Scriptures  had  been  inspired  of  God  and 
contained  His  thoughts  in  His  words,  they  would  not 
have  consisted  of  the  ordinary  words  and  peculiar 
styles,  phrases,  idioms,  etc.,  which  constitute  and  are 
actually  written  in  our  Bible.  But  if  they  had  been 
inspired  and  written  in  any  other  than  the  language  of 
common  life,  and  the  peculiar  styles  and  idioms  of  the 
respective  writers,  then  neither  the  sacred  penmen 
themselves,  nor  their  contemporaries,  nor  the  common 
people  of  later  generations,  and  of  different  nations, 
could  have  understood  them  ;  they  would  not  have 
been  adapted  to  their  object  in  any  respect.  And 
then  the  critics  who  believe  in  no  supernatural  revela- 
tions or  inspirations  of  any  kind,  would  have  objected 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  251 

that  tliey  were  above  the  intelligence  of  mankind,  ob- 
scure, unintelligible,  not  adapted  to  their  professed  ob- 
ject, and  therefore  could  not  have  been  communicated 
from  an  infinitely  wise  and  good  Being. 

Moreover,  if  any  of  those  who  believe  in  the  Divine 
authority  of  the  Bible,  or  that  it  contains  revelations 
from  God,  regard  the  styles  and  idioms  in  which  it  is 
written,  as  an  objection  to  the  doctrine  of  plenary  verbal 
inspiration,  they  must,  to  be  consistent,  regard  those 
characteristics  as  objections  of  no  less  weight  to  the 
theory  of  an  infallible  Divine  guidance  of  the  writers 
in  the  choice  and  arrangement  of  their  own  words.  A 
theory  of  the  mode  of  such  supposed  guidance  by  a 
combination  of  Divine  and  human  agencies,  will  not 
deter  the  criticism  of  any  school  of  antagonist  philoso- 
phers. The  fact  that  those  styles  characterize  the 
writings,  remains  and  is  undeniable ;  and  if,  neverthe- 
less, the  Bible  is  the  infallible  word  of  God,  that  fact 
is  at  least  as  consistent  with  the  doctrine  of  plenary 
verbal  inspiration,  as  with  any  theory  of  infallible 
Divine  guidance. 

3d.  To  that  particular  expression  of  the  '  mechanical ' 
theory  which  asserts  '  that  the  Holy  Spirit  merely  ac- 
commodated Himself  to  the  different  peculiarities  of 
the  sacred  writers — that  He  inspired  His  amanuenses 
with  those  expressions  which  they  would  have  em- 
ployed had  they  been  left  to  themselves,'  (p.  23,) 
he  objects  no  less  decidedly  than  to  the  theory  itself  as 
exhibited  in  his  own  statement  of  it.  Of  this  expla- 
natory view,  which  signifies  that  He  inspired  the 
writers  with  those  words  which  they  would  naturally 
have  employed  to  express  precisely  the  same  thoughts 


252  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

in  the  same  connections,  had  they  previously  possessed 
the  thoughts,  he  says:  "  It  is,  perhaps,  unnecessary  to 
remark,  that  this  wholly  hypothetical  statement  as- 
sumes an  exercise  of  the  Divine  agency  for  which  no 
motive  can  be  assigned,  or  end  pointed  out"  (P.  23.) 
But  why  should  there  not  be  the  same  motive  and  end 
for  this  exercise  of  the  Divine  agency,  as  for  the  exer- 
cise of  that  agency  in  the  infallible  guidance  of  the 
writers  in  their  selection  of  the  very  same  words  ?  His. 
whole  difficulty,  the  problem  which  he  is  so  anxious,  and 
which  it  is  the  aim  of  his  copious  volume  to  solve,  is, 
how  to  account  for  the  fact  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  are 
written  in  the  peculiar  styles  and  idioms  of  the  writers. 
1  The  maintainers  of  the  "  mechanical "  theory,  he  says, 
either  offer  no  explanation  of  this,  or  are  reduced  to 
the  necessity  of  putting  forward  the  explanation  given 
abeve,'  which  he  brands  as  hypothetically  assuming  an 
exercise  of  Divine  agency  without  motive  or  end,  and 
as  closely  resembling  a  doctrine  of  the  Docetas  of  old. 
This  is  no  answer ;  and  we  must  regard  it  as  his  fore- 
gone conclusion,  necessitated  by  his  theory,  that  the 
words  in  which  the  Divine  thoughts  are  expressed 
were  selected  by  the  human  agents  ;  that  there  could 
be  no  sense  in  supposing  them  to  be  inspired  into  the 
minds  of  the  writers  after  they  had  selected  them,  and 
therefore  no  motive  to  such  an  exercise  of  the  Divine 
agency,  nor  any  end  to  be  answered  by  it ;  but  being- 
man's  words,  selected  by  man,  and  therefore  fallible  and 
uncertain,  there  needed  a  combination  of  the  Divine 
agency  with  his,  to  make  them  the  words  of  God  and 
infallible !  This,  when  his  theory  was  uppermost  in 
his  view,  appeared  to  him  to  solve  the  problem. 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCEIPTUKES.  253 

Whereas,  if  the  words,  instead  of  being  selected  by  the 
amanuenses,  were  inspired  into  their  minds  as  the  ad- 
junct and  necessary  vehicle  of  the  previously  un- 
known truths  to  be  expressed  in  writing,  then,  con- 
trary to  his  assumptions,  there  was  no  problem  in  the 
case,  no  two  distinct  elements,  no  combination  of 
Divine  and  human  agency,  no  lack  of  infallibility  to 
be  supplied,  and  no  occasion  for  a  volume  on  the 
*  Dynamical '  theory. 

VI.  His  distinction  between  Revelation  and  Inspiration. 

The  author  deems  the  distinction  which  he  makes 
between  revelation  and  inspiration  to  be  essential 
to  his  view  of  the  dynamical  theory,  inasmuch  as, 
pursuant  to  that  distinction,  he  ascribes  all  revelations 
to  the  Logos — the  official  Mediatorial  Person ;  and  in- 
spiration to  the  Holy  Spirit.  "Kevelation  and  inspira- 
tion," he  says,  uare  to  be  distinguished  by  the  sources 
from  which  they  proceed — revelation  being  the  peculiar 
function  of  the  Eternal  Word  ;  inspiration  the  result  of 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Their  difference,  in 
short,  is  specific,  and  not  merely  one  of  degree :  a  point 
which  is  amply  confirmed  by  the  consideration,  that 
either  of  these  Divine  influences  may  be  exerted,  al- 
though the  other  be  not  called  into  action."  (P.  29.) 
Again:  "While  inspiration  (as  the  signification  of  the 
term  denotes)  is  the  peculiar  function  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
—so,  in  like  manner,  to  reveal  is  the  office  appropriated 
to  the  Eternal  Word."  (P.  115.)  In  connection  with 
these  passages  he  further  expressly  refers  all  direct 
revelations  from  God  to  man,  whether  conveyed  in 
words  or  in  acts,  to  the  Logos,  or  Mediatorial  Person, 


254  THE  PLENAEY   INSPIRATION 

to  whom  he  also  ascribes  the  works  of  creation  and 
providence.  This  naturally  leads  him  to  refer  to  the 
manifestations  and  agency  of  that  Person  in  the  pro- 
gress of  the  ancient  dispensations  under  the  appella- 
tion, which  in  our  Bible  is  rendered  Angel — the  angel 
of  Jehovah.  That  term,  however,  when  employed  to 
designate  that  Person,  is  not  employed  as  a  proper 
name,  but  only  as  a  name  of  office,  and  would,  in 
every  instance,  be  most  properly  rendered  Messenger — 
the  Divine  Person  delegated,  sent,  by  the  Father ;  as 
in  Malachi  3  :  1 — "  The  Messenger  of  the  Covenant." 
It  is  accordingly,  in  numerous  instances,  employed  in- 
terchangeably with  Jehovah,  and  other  Divine  names 
and  designations,  as  in  the  portion  of  Malachi  just  re- 
ferred to — "The  Lord,  whom  ye  seek,  shall  suddenly 
come  to  his  temple,  even  the  messenger  of  the  covenant, 
whom  ye  delight  in."  To  that  Divine  Person  in  his 
delegated  character,  "  who  appeared  to  Moses  in  the 
bush,"  and  "  was  with  him  in  the  church  in  the  wilder- 
ness, and  spake  to  him  in  the  Mount  Sinai,  and  with 
our  fathers,  who  received  the  lively  oracles  to  give 
unto  us,"  (Acts  7  :  35,  37,)  and  who  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  called  the  Logos — the  Word — and  the  Apostle, 
that  is,  the  Messenger,  and  High  Priest  of  our  profes- 
sion, Christ  Jesus,  our  author  ascribes  all  Divine  revela- 
tions and  all  miraculous  operations,  both  under  the  old 
and  new  dispensations.  But  not  finding  all  the  ex- 
press revelations  in  either  Testament  directly  referred 
to  his  Personal  agency,  he  supposes  that  those  which 
are  not  so  referred,  or  rather  that  all  made  after  a  cer- 
tain period,  were  made  by  him  through  an  intermediate 
agency,  indissolubly  connected  with  "  the  Eternal 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  255 

Word,"  by  which  "His  Presence  was  supplied,  and 
His  revelations  were  communicated."  (P.  127.)  "The 
agency  now  introduced,"  he  adds,  "is  described, 
generically,  as  the  Spirit  of  God," — and  he  supposes  it 
to  be  indicated  by  such  phrases  as  "  The  Spirit  of 
God  came  upon  Balaam  and  Saul,  as  upon  Azariah  and 
Ezekiel  "— "  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  fell  upon  Ezekiel" 
— "The  Spirit  lifted  him  up  and  brought  him  unto 
the  east  gate  of  the  Lord's  house  " — "  The  hand  of  the 
Lord  was  on  Elijah — the  hand  of  the  Lord  God  fell 
upon  Ezekiel — the  hand  of  the  Lord  was  with  John 
the  Baptist — the  word  of  the  Lord  came  expressly  unto 
Ezekiel — the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  such  or  such  a 
prophet — Moses  thus  denotes  revelations  in  the  time  of 
Abraham,"  etc.,  etc.  (P.  131.)  He  supposes  that  these, 
and  the  like  phrases,  point  "  to  some  Divine  agency 
which  always  accompanies,  or  proceeds  from  the  Eternal 
Word  ; — an  operation  which  he  produces,  but  not  the 
Divine  Logos  Himself.  It  is  only  in  the  language  of 
St.  John  that  the  idea  of  the  Personality  of  the  Word 
is  expressed.  In  the  Old  Testament,  with  the  excep- 
tions already  noted,  Christ  appears  to  act  rather 
through  the  medium  of  this  operative  power,  than  after 
the  manner  of  a  Person ;  and  thus  in  the  passage, 
Through  faith  we  understand  that  the  worlds  were 
framed  by  the  word  of  God,  not  the  Personal  word, 
(Logos,)  but  this  Divine  operative  energy  (rhema 
Theou)  is  represented  as  the  immediate  source  of  all 
created  things.  In  conformity  with  this  idea,  St. 
Peter  tells  us  that  it  was  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  which 
spake  in  the  prophets."  (P.  133.) 

We  humbly  conceive  that  all  this  is  little  better 


256  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

than  confusion,  and  that  a  theory  of  Inspiration 
which  requires  such  solecisms,  such  inconsistencies,  and 
such  looseness  of  explanation  and  reference,  can  afford 
little  satisfaction  to  any  class  of  readers.  He  ascribes 
to  the  Personal  Word  the  original  act  of  creation,  and 
"  all  exhibitions  of  supernatural  power,  whether  by 
word  or  by  act :  whether  they  be  in  short,  revelations, 
properly  so  called,  or  miracles."  (P.  118.)  He  labors 
to  show  on  the  one  hand,  that  this  official  Person,  is 
Personally  and  exclusively  The  Eevealer,  as  He  is 
Personally,  and  exclusively  of  the  agency  of  the 
other  Divine  Persons — the  Creator  ;  and  on  the  other, 
that  inspiration  peculiarly  and  exclusively  belongs  to 
the  office  and  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  yet  to 
account  for  the  fact  that  in  part  the  Eevelations  are  in 
the  Scripture  itself,  ascribed  directly  to  the  Spirit,  he 
conceives  that  to  be  but  a  subordinate  instrumental 
agency,  an  "operative  poiuer" — "a  Divine  operative 
energy"  To  give  some  color  of  plausibility  to  this 
"  condition"  of  his  theory,  he  assumes  that  He  who  in 
His  official  mediatorial  capacity  created  the  world,  ap- 
peared visibly  to  and  conversed  with  the  Patriarchs 
and  Moses,  and  was  by  his  office  the  immediate  author 
of  Divine  Kevelations,  withdrew  as  to  his  personal 
presence  and  direct  agency,  and  ceased  to  act  immedi- 
ately as  Revealer,  and  substituted  in  place  of  His  own 
personal  presence  and  agency,  certain  instrumentalities, 
described,  generically,  as  the  Spirit  of  God.  Thus  he 
writes,  (P.  125,)  "  Let  us  look  to  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  immediate  intervention  of  the  uncreat- 
ed angel,  [that  is,  Jehovah,  officially  designated  as  the 
messenger]  was  withdrawn.  As,  in  after  times,  the 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  257 

Jewish  people,  *  denied  the  Holy  One  and  the  Just,'  so 
in  the  days  of  Moses  they  rebelled  against  their 
Divine  Guide,  [namely,  Jehovah,  the  Messenger :]  they 
despised  the  stern  warning  of  Jehovah,  [the  Messen- 
ger,] and  worshipped  the  calf  in  Horeb.  On  that  occa- 
sion the  solemn  promise,  that  the  uncreated  angel, 
[Jehovah  as  the  messenger]  should  continue  to  precede 
the  armies  of  Israel,  was  as  solemnly  revoked,  and  a 
created  angel  assigned  as  their  leader.  'I  will  send 
an  angel  before  thee,'  said  the  Lord,  [that  is,  Jehovah 
in  Bis  official  capacity  as  the  Messenger,  said,]  '  for  I 
will  not  go  up  in  the  midst  of  thee,  for  thou  art  a  stiff- 
necked  people,  lest  I  consume  thee  in  the  way,'  '  [that 
is,  I,  Jehovah,  who  in  my  delegated  official  capacity  as 
The  Messenger,  appeared  visibly  to  Abraham,  to 
Jacob,  to  Moses,  to  the  seventy  elders  on  Mount  Sinai, 
who  conducted  the  children  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt, 
and,  enveloped  in  the  pillar  of  cloud  and  fire,  am  the 
leader  of  Israel,  will  not  henceforth  go  up  in  the 
midst  of  thee,  lest  I  consume  thee  in  the  way.] 
"  Here,  then,  as  in  the  age  of  the  Incarnation,  the 
Personal  Presence  of  the  Eternal  Son  is  withdrawn, 
[that  is,  He  threatens  personally  to  withdraw  ;] — and 
here,  too,  although  in  a  veiled  and  mysterious  manner, 
that  Presence  was  supplied."  [It  was  supplied  by  his 
continuing  in  fact  to  be  personally  present.]  "God 
promises  the  people  that  they  should  not  be  forsaken. 
My  presence  [that  is,  my  visible  presence,  I  myself, 
personally]  shall  go  with  thee,  and  I  will  give  thee 
rest.  Henceforward,  as  in  the  Gospel  times,  God's  dis- 
pensation was  no  longer  administered  by  the  Personal 
Presence  of  the  Eternal  Son  ;  but  in  both  cases  certain 


258  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

glimpses  of  His  appearance  were,  from  time  to  time, 
vouchsafed."  After  observing  as  illustrations  of  this, 
that  Daniel  saw  "one  like  the  Son  of  Man" — that  Ste- 
phen saw  "  the  Son  of  Man,"  and  that  John  saw  Him 
who  is  called  "  The  Word  of  God,"  he  proceeds  :  "  At 
all  events,  we  know  that  subsequently  to  the  age  of  Moses,  the 
immediate  communications  of  Jehovah,  as  a  general  rule, 
ceased,  and  that  certain  means  were  made  use  of  for  con- 
veying His  Revelations"  (P.  125-127.) 

It  would,  perhaps,  be  difficult  to  find  in  any  of  the 
myths  of  German  speculation,  any  thing  more  incon- 
sistent and  absurd  than  these  passages.  It  would  be 
tedious  and  useless  to  dwell  upon  them  to  any  consid- 
erable extent.  What  could  be  more  preposterous 
than  to  attempt  to  uphold  a  theory  in  this  manner  ? 
The  author,  in  express  terms,  ascribes  all  Eevelations 
to  the  immediate  agency  of  God  the  Son  in  that  dele- 
gated character  and  office  in  which  he  is  called  by  the 
Divine  Names,  and  by  the  official  designations  above 
referred  to — the  angel,  the  Logos,  the  Christ — and  in 
which  he  created  the  world,  appeared  in  Person  and 
spoke  to  patriarchs  and  prophets,  administered  the 
primeval  and  theocratic  dispensations,  and  at  length 
took  man's  nature  into  union  with  His  Person.  On 
the  other  hand  he  expressly  excludes  Eevelations  from 
the  office  and  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  ascribes 
to  Him  only  that  influence  or  that  exercise  of  His 
power  by  which  He  inspired  the  sacred  writers  so  as 
to  enable  them  to  record  what  was  revealed.  But  to 
sustain  his  hypothesis,  it  was  necessary  to  account  for 
those  Eevelations  which  were  not  made  by  the  imme- 
diate agency  of  the  Son,  owing,  as  he  conceives,  to  His 


OF  THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  259 

Personal  absence  both  under  the  Old,  and,  after  His 
ascension,  under  the  New  Testament ;  and  to  account 
for  them,  he  conceives  that  they  were  made  by  Him 
when  Personally  absent,  through  "  an  intermediate 
agency  indissolubly  connected  with  the  Eternal  Word ;" 
"  some  Divine  Agency  which  always  accompanies  or 
proceeds  from  Him" — "His  mediating  Angel" — an 
agency  which  "is  described,  generically,  as  the  Spirit 
of  God  " — an  agency  which  excluded  the  idea  of  the 
Personality  of  the  Son — an  operative  power,  through 
which  under  the  Old  Testament,  Christ  acted,  but  not 
after  the  manner  of  a  Person,  and  by  which  finally 
the  Spirit  of  Christ  spake  in  the  prophets. 

The  reader  must  imagine  for  himself  what  that  im- 
personal, intermediate  agency  and  operative  power, 
was,  to  which  the  revelation  of  the  oracles  of  God  is 
thus  ascribed.  But  did  the  Uncreated  Angel — Jeho- 
vah, the  Messenger,  the  God  of  Israel,  personally  with- 
draw from  His  station  as  leader  of  the  armies  of  Israel, 
on  the  occasion  specified  by  our  author,  and  thencefor- 
ward cease  to  act  immediately  towards  them  as  Re- 
vealer  or  otherwise  ?  This  the  Scriptures,  not  the 
theory  and  language  of  our  author,  must  determine. 
And  that  He  did  not  then  withdraw,  as  to  his  Per- 
sonal Presence,  manifestations,  agencies,  revelations, 
immediate  acts  as  Ruler  and  Leader,  and  in  all  His 
Personal  and  official  relations,  is  demonstrated  by  the 
terms  employed  in  the  narrative,  the  argument  of 
Moses,  and  the  record  of  what  subsequently  took  place. 
Our  author  overlooks  the  fact  that  it  was  the  Uncreated 
Angel  Himself,  the  Divine  Person,  designated  indif- 
ferently, conjointly  and  interchangeably  by  Divine 
names  and  official  appellations,  and  speaking,  often, 


260  «     THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

i 

throughout  the  Scriptures  as  well  before  as  when  in- 
carnate, in  His  capacity  simply  as  Divine,  to  and  of 
Himself  in  His  capacity  as  a  delegated  and  official  Per- 
son ;  the  Divine  Person  who  conducted  the  children 
of  Israel  out  of  Egypt,  gave  the  Law  at  Sinai,  and 
wrote  it  on  tablets  of  stone,  who,  on  the  occasion  re- 
ferred to,  indicated,  for  a  reason  which  He  assigned, 
namely,  the  obstinacy  of  the  people,  His  purpose  to 
withdraw  from  the  station  which  He  had  hitherto  oc- 
cupied as  their  Leader,  and  to  send  a  created  Angel  to 
guide  them.  It  was  directly  to  that  Person  that  Moses 
addressed  his  prayer  and  his  argument,  that  His  Per- 
sonal presence,  in  distinction  from  that  of  any  created 
leader,  might  be  continued  with  them  ;  and  who  com- 
plied with  his  entreaties,  forgave,  on  their  repentance, 
and  passed  by  the  rebellion,  and  entered  into  a  new  cov- 
enant with  the  people,  and  assured  them  of  a  continu- 
ance of  His  own  Personal  Presence.  The  occasion  was 
such  as  would  have  justified  an  abandonment,  and  even 
an  instant  destruction  of  the  whole  congregation.  But 
Moses  interceded — the  people  humbled  themselves,  the 
threatened  punishment  was  averted.  "  The  Lord  said 
unto  Moses,  Depart  and  go  up  hence — I  will  send  an 
angel  before  thee — I  will  not  go  up  in  the  midst  of 
thee  ;  for  thou  art  a  stiff-necked  people  :  lest  I  consume 
thee  in  the  way.  And  when  the  people  heard  these 
evil  tidings  they  mourned  " — they  sought  the  Lord — 
went  to  the  Tabernacle — the  cloudy  pillar  descended 
[from  the  top  of  Horeb]  and  stood  at  the  door  of  the 
Tabernacle — Moses  had  confessed  the  great  sin  of  the 
people  and  implored  the  forgiveness  of  it — he  renews 
his  prayer,  deprecates  the  threatened  substitution  of  a 
created  leader — and  he  is  answered  :  "  My  Presence," 


OF   THE   HOLY  SCRIPTUKES.  261 

my  own  personal  presence,  as  heretofore,  I,  myself, 
"  shall  go  with  thee,  and  I  will  give  thee  rest."  The 
Divine  Speaker  was  then  personally  present.  He  had 
theretofore  been  constantly  present,  and  gone  with  and 
before  them.  It  was  the  continuance  of  this  personal 
presence  that  Moses  desired ;  He  deemed  that  essen- 
tial— without  it  he  desired  not  to  go  forward — and  he 
earnestly  argues  to  this  point.  ' '  For  wherein  shall  it 
be  known  here  that  I  and  thy  people  have  found  grace 
in  thy  sight  ?  Is  it  not  in  that  Thou  goest  with  us  ? 
So  shall  we  be  separated,  I  and  Thy  people,  from  all  the 
people  that  are  upon  the  face  of  the  earth  ?  And  the 
Lord  said  unto  Moses,  I  will  do  this  thing  also  that  thou 
hast  spoken."  (Exod.  33.  Also,  Deut,  9  :  25-29.)  As 
much  as  to  say,  How  shall  we  know  and  be  assured, 
that  thou  hast  pardoned  the  late  rebellion,  that  we 
have  found  grace  in  thy  sight,  and  that  thou  wilt  con- 
tinue us  a  separate  people  pursuant  to  the  former  cove- 
nants and  promises,  if  thou,  the  author  of  those  cove- 
nants and  promises,  confirmed  by  oaths,  miracles,  and 
wonderful  providences,  withdrawest  from  us,  and  send- 
est  a  fallible  and  powerless  creature  to  be  our  leader 
and  guide  ?  Accordingly,  Moses,  for  further  assurance 
that  the  point  was  gained,  and  the  former  relations,  in- 
tercourse, and  guidance  were  to  be  continued,  besought 
the  Divine  Leader  to  show  him  His  glory.  This 
was  complied  with  by  a  visible  manifestation  of  His 
glorious  Person.  "  The  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Hew 

O  ' 

thee  two  tables  of  stone  like  unto  the  first ;  and  I  will 
write  upon  these  tables  the  words  that  were  in  the  first 
tables  which  thou  brakest.  And  be  ready  in  the 
morning,  and  come  up  in  the  morning  unto  Mount 


262  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

Sinai,  and  present  thyself  there  to  me  in  the  top  of  the 
Mount.  .  .  .  And  he  hewed  two  tables  of  stone  .  .  .  and 
went  up  unto  Mount  Sinai.  .  .  .  And  the  Lord  de- 
scended in  the  cloud  and  stood  with  him  there,  and  pro- 
claimed the  name  of  the  Lord,  and  the  Lord  passed  by 
before  him  .  .  .  and  Moses  made  haste,  and  bowed  his 
head  toward  the  earth,  and  worshipped.  And,"  reassur- 
ed as  he  now  was,  "  he  said,  If  now  I  have  found  grace 
in  thy  sight,  0  Lord,  let  my  Lord  I  pray  thee  go  among 
us  (for  it  is  a  stiff-necked  people)  and  pardon  our  ini- 
quity and  our  sin,  and  take  us  for  thine  inheritance. 
And  he  said,  Behold  I  make  a  covenant."  (Exod.  34.) 
Then  follow  the  stipulations  of  the  covenant.  "And 
the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Write  thou  these  words  ;  for 
after  the  tenor  of  these  words  I  have  made  a  covenant 
with  thee  and  with  Israel.  And  he  was  there  with  the 
Lord,  forty  days  and  forty  nights."  After  he  had  de- 
scended, the  children  of  Israel  came  nigh ;  "  and  he 
gave  them  in  commandment  all  that  the  Lord  had 
spoken  with  him  in  Mount  Sinai.  And  till  Moses  had 
done  speaking  with  them,  he  put  a  veil  on  his  face. 
But  when  Moses  went  in  before  the  Lord  to  speak  ivith 
Him,  he  took  off  the  vail."  (Exod.  34.) 

An  altered  state  of  feeling,  a  reformation,  in  the 
minds  of  the  people  seems  to  have  followed  these 
events.  The  next  chapters  contain  the  command- 
ments received  by  Moses  from  the  Lord  at  the  late  per- 
sonal interviews,  concerning  the  materials,  and  a  nar- 
rative of  the  construction  and  setting  up  of  the  Taber- 
nacle: which  being  accomplished,  "A  cloud  covered 
the  tent  of  the  congregation,  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord 
filled  the  tabernacle  .  .  and  when  the  cloud  was  taken 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  263 

up  from  over  the  tabernacle,  the  children  of  Israel  went 
onward  in  all  their  journeys.  But  if  the  cloud  were 
not  taken  up,  then  they  journeyed  not  till  the  day  that 
it  was  taken  up.  For  the  cloud  of  the  Lord  was  upon 
the  tabernacle  by  day,  and  fire  by  night,  in  the  sight 
of  all  the  house  of  Israel  throughout  all  their  jour- 
neys." (Exod.  40.)  Thus  the  same  tokens  and  de- 
monstrations of  His  Personal  Presence  and  intercourse, 
which  had  been  given  previously  to  the  alleged  with- 
drawment,  were  continued  and  fully  realized  subse- 
quently. The  Books  of  Leviticus  and  Numbers,  con- 
sist almost  wholly  of  words  spoken  by  Him  to  Moses, 
after  that  date.  "At  the  commandment  of  the  Lord 
they  rested  in  the  tents,  and  at  the  commandment  of 
the  Lord  they  journeyed  :  they  kept  the  charge  of  the 
Lord  at  the  commandment  of  the  Lord,  by  the  hand 
of  Moses."  (Numb.  9.) 

The  14th  chapter  of  Numbers  narrates  another  re- 
bellion occasioned  by  the  evil  report  of  those  sent  to  in- 
spect the  promised  land;  and  another  prevalent  argu- 
ment and  prayer  of  Moses  for  their  pardon.  "  And  the 
Lord  said,  I  have  pardoned  according  to  thy  word  :  but 
as  truly  as  I  live,  all  the  earth  shall  be  filled  with  the 
glory  of  the  Lord.  Because  all  these  men  which  have 
seen  my  glory,  and  my  miracles  which  I  did  in  Egypt 
and  in  the  wilderness,  have  tempted  me  now  these  ten 
times,  and  have  not  hearkened  to  my  voice,  surely  they 
shall  not  see  the  land  which  I  sware  unto  their  fathers." 
This  shows  conclusively  that  He  who  now  spoke,  was 
the  same  Person  who  spoke  and  wrought  miracles  in 
Egypt  and  at  Sinai ;  and  the  New  Testament  expressly 
informs  us  that  it  was  the  Mediatorial  Person,  the 


261:  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

Christ,  whom  the  Israelites  "tempted"  in  the  wilder- 
ness, (1  Cor.  10,  and  Heb.  3.)  where  "the  Apostle 
[Messenger]  and  High  Priest  of  our  profession,  Christ 
Jesus,  who  was  faithful  to  Him  that  appointed  Him," 
is  shown  to  be  superior  to  Moses;  "  wherefore,"  it  is 
argued,  "  as  the  Holy  Ghost  saith,  To-day  if  ye  will 
hear  His  voice,  harden  not  your  hearts  as  in  the  provo- 
cation in  the  day  of  temptation  in  the  wilderness ; 
when  your  fathers  tempted  Me,  and  proved  Me,  and  saw 
My  works  forty  years.  Wherefore  I  was  grieved  with 
that  generation  ...  so  I  sware  in  My  wrath,  They  shall 
not  enter  into  My  rest." 

The  entire  narrative  to  the  close  of  the  life  of  Moses, 
is  one  consistent  testimony  to  the  continued  Personal 
Presence  and  immediate  agency  of  that  Divine  Person. 
By  a  constant  miracle  He  supplied  their  physical  wants. 
By  His  power  He  destroyed  their  enemies.  By  His 
voice  He  instructed  them,  prescribed  their  worship,  and 
directed  their  journeys.  He  appeared  visibly  to  Ba- 
laam, and  was  seen  by  him  with  a  drawn  sword  in  His 
hand.  He  spoke  to  the  disobedient  prophet,  who  heard 
His  voice  and  answered.  While  visible,  He  is  desig- 
nated as  the  messenger — when  not  visible,  as  Jehovah 
and  as  God.  Under  these  several  designations,  Balaam 
recognized  the  same  Person,  and  spoke  to,  and  was 
answered  by,  Him  as  such.  The  Messenger  Jehovah 
said  to  him :  "Go  with  the  men,  but  only  the  word 
that  I  shall  speak  unto  thee,  that  thou  shalt  speak.  .  .  . 
And  God  met  Balaam.  .  .  .  And  the  Lord  put  a  word 
in  Balaam's  mouth,  and  said,  Eeturn  unto  Balak,  and 
thus  shalt  thou  speak.  .  .  .  He  heard  the  words  of  God, 
and  said,  I  shall  see  Him,  [the  Messiah  incarnate,]  .  .  . 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  265 

there  shall  come  a  star  out  of  Jacob.  .  .  .  Out  of  Jacob 
shall  come  He  that  shalt  have  dominion."  (Numb.  24.) 
Shortly  preceding  the  death  of  Moses,  and  the  passage 
of  the  Israelites  over  Jordan,  He  said  to  them:  "The 
Lord  thy  God,  He  will  go  over  before  thee  .  .  .  and 
Joshua,  he  shall  go  over  before  thee,  as  the  Lord  hath 
said."  .  .  .  And  to  Joshua  He  said :  "  The  Lord,  He 
it  is  that  doth  go  before  thee  ;  He  will  be  with  thee. . . . 
And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Behold  thy  days  ap- 
proach that  thou  must  die ;  call  Joshua  and  present 
yourselves  in  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  that 
I  may  give  him  a  charge.  .  .  .  And  the  Lord  appeared 
in  the  Tabernacle  in  a  pillar  of  a  cloud  :  and  the  pillar 
of  the  cloud  stood  over  the  door  of  the  Tabernacle." 
(Deut.  31.)  He  was  therefore  Personally  present  in 
the  same  manner  as  at  Sinai ;  and  on  this  occasion  He 
spoke  to  Moses,  the  songs,  blessings,  threatenings,  and 
predictions  which  he  afterwards  recorded. 

Thus  far  then,  from  the  date  of  the  rebellion  at 
Sinai,  "God's  dispensation"  was,  and  continued  to  be, 
"  administered  by  the  Personal  Presence  of  the  Eternal 
Son."  "But,"  says  Professor  Lee,  "at  all  events  we 
know  that  subsequently  to  the  age  of  Moses,  the  im- 
mediate communications  of  Jehovah,  as  a  general  rule, 
ceased,  and  that  certain  means  were  made  use  of  for 
conveying  his  revelations."  We  propose,  therefore,  to 
show  that  the  dispensation  was  further  administered  by 
the  same  Personal  Presence,  down  to  the  destruction  of 
the  first  temple ;  and  that  the  communications  of  Je- 
hovah— His  revelations,  His  vocal  utterances,  His  re- 
ponses  in  the  tabernacle  and  temple,  His  occasional 
visible  appearances,  and  His  miraculous  acts,  were  as 

12 


266  THE    PLENARY    INSPIRATION 

immediate  and  direct  as  those  which  preceded,  or  those 
which  are  recorded  in  the  New  Testament. 

1.  There  was  no  cessation  of  His  Personal  Presence, 
His  miraculous  agency,  and  His  verbal  directions  and 
revelations  during  the  ministry  of  Joshua.  " After  the 
death  of  Moses  the  Lord  spoke  unto  Joshua"  command- 
ing him  to  go  over  Jordan  with  the  people,  and  giving 
him  various  directions  and  promises  of  success.  (Josh.  1.) 
When  about  to  cross  the  Jordan,  "Joshua  said  unto 
the  children  of  Israel,  Come  hither  and  hear  the  words 
of  the  Lord  your  God.  .  .  Hereby  ye  shall  know  that 
the  living  God  is  among  you.  .  .  Behold  the  ark  of  the 
covenant  of  the  Lord  of  all  the  earth  passeth  over  be- 
fore you  into  Jordan."  (Chap.  3.)  In  the  next  and  en- 
suing chapters,  the  acts  and  proceedings  of  Joshua  are 
performed  in  obedience  to  the  express  verbal  directions 
of  Jehovah.  A  commemorative  monument  of  His  im- 
mediate agency  in  opening  a  passage  across  the  bed  of 
the  river,  was  erected  to  signify  to  the  children  of  that 
generation  that  "the  Lord  your  God  dried  up — cut  off 
the  waters  of  Jordan  from  before  you,  until  ye  were 
passed  over,  as  the  Lord  your  God  [the  messenger  in 
the  cloudy  pillar]  did  to  the  Eed  Sea,  which  he  dried 
up  from  before  us,  until  we  were  gone  over."  After 
the  passage,  and  prior  to  the  conquest  of  Jericho,  He 
appeared  to  Joshua,  as  on  several  occasions  to  others,  as 
a  man  with  a  drawn  sword  in  his  hand.  "And  the 
Lord,"  he  who  thus  appeared,  u  said  to  Joshua,  See,  I 
have  given  into  thine  hand  Jericho."  (Chap.  6.)  Then 
follow  particular  directions  for  compassing  the  city  with 
the  ark  of  the  Lord.  "When  repulsed  at  Ai,  Joshua 
fell  on  his  face  before  the  ark  of  the  Lord,  and  wor- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  267 

shipped  Him  as  personally  present  there,  saying:  "Alas ! 
O  Lord  God!"  Achan  was  discovered  by  His  direct 
interposition.  (Chap.  7.)  When  the  five  kings  of  the 
Amorites  combined  against  Israel,  "The  Lord  said  unto 
Joshua  :  Fear  them  not,  for  I  have  delivered  them  into 
thine  hand ;  the  Lord  discomfited  them  before  Israel, 
and  cast  down  great  stones  from  heaven  upon  them ; 
they  were  more  which  died  of  the  hail-stones,  than 
they  whom  the  children  of  Israel  slew  with  the  sword. 
Then  spake  Joshua  to  the  Lord,  in  the  day  when  the 
Lord  delivered  up  the  Amorites  before  the  children  of 
Israel,  and  he  said  in  the  sight  of  all  Israel,  Sun,  stand 
thou  still  upon  Gibeon,  and  thou  moon  in  the  valley  of 
Ajalon.  So  the  sun  stood  still  in  the  midst  of  heaven, 
and  hasted  not  to  go  down  about  a  whole  day,  and 
there  was  no  day  like  that  before  it  or  after  it." 
(Chap.  10.)  This  was  one  of  the  most  signal,  direct, 
and  immediate  interpositions  of  Jehovah's  power  which 
is  recorded  in  the  Bible.  The  occasion  was  adequate. 
The  question  at  issue  was,  whether  or  not  the  God  of 
Israel  was  superior,  absolutely  and  infinitely,  to  Baal, 
the  god  of  the  Amorites,  whose  tabernacle  the  sun  was 
held  to  be,  while  the  moon  was  that  of  Ashtaroth,  the 
pagan  queen  of  heaven. 

At  the  close  of  his  career,  Joshua  assembled  the 
tribes  and  rehearsed  to  them  as  vocally  expressed  to 
him  by  "the  Lord  God  of  Israel,"  an  outline  of  His 
dealings  with  them,  from  the  call  of  Abraham  to  that 
time,  showing  that  pursuant  to  His  covenants  and  pro- 
mises He  had  guided  them,  defended  them,  and  given 
them  possession  of  the  promised  land.  And  Joshua 
made  a  covenant  with  the  people,  and  the  people  said : 


268  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

"  The  Lord  our  God  will  we  serve,  and  His  voice  will 
we  obey."  (Chap.  2-i.) 

2.  That  He  continued  to  administer  the  dispensation 
by  His  Personal  Presence,  and  agency,  and  his  verbal 
directions  and  revelations,  during  the  period  of  the 
Judges  and  Samuel,  three  hundred  and  thirty  years,  is 
no  less  evident.  On  occasions  of  emergency  the  people 
asked  and  received  from  Him  express  verbal  directions. 
Visible  appearances  of  the  Messenger  Jehovah,  and 
many  extraordinary  interpositions  of  His  power,  were 
also  vouchsafed  to  them.  .  .  Thus,  immediately  after 
the  death  of  Joshua,  "  the  children  of  Israel  asked  the 
Lord,  saying,  Who  shall  go  up  for  us  against  the 
Canaanites,  first  to  fight  against  them  ?  And  the  Lord 
said,  Judah  shall  go  up  :  behold,  I  have  delivered  the 
land  into  his  hand.  .  .  And  Judah  went  up,  and  the 
Lord  delivered  the  Canaanites  and  the  Perizzites  into 
their  hand.  .  .  And  the  Lord  was  with  Judah.  .  .  And 
the  house  of  Joseph  went  up  against  Bethel :  and  the 
Lord  was  with  them."  (Judges  1.) 

From  the  conquest  of  Jericho  to  the  close  of  Joshua's 
life,  his  camp  was  at  Gilgal,  where  the  tabernacle  and 
the  ark  of  the  Lord  were  stationed,  and  continued  dur- 
ing a  much  longer  period.  It  was  at  that  place  that 
Jehovah  the  Messenger  appeared  to  Joshua  in  the  like- 
ness of  a  man ;  and  from  His  dwelling-place  in  the 
tabernacle  there,  He  appeared  visibly  at  other  places 
from  time  to  time.  Accordingly  we  read,  (Judges  2  :) 
"And  the  Messenger  Jehovah  came  up  from  Gilgal  to 
Bochim,  and  said :  /  made  you  to  go  up  out  of  Egypt, 
and  have  brought  you  unto  the  land  which  /  sware  unto 
your  fathers ;  and  I  said,  I  will  never  break  my  cove- 


OF  THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  269 

nant  with  you.  And  ye  shall  make  no  league  with  the 
inhabitants  of  this  land ;  ye  shall  throw  down  their 
altars  :  but  ye  have  not  obeyed  my  voice  ;  why  have 
ye  done  this  ?  Wherefore,  I  also  said,  I  will  not  drive 
them  out  from  before  you."  The  terms  of  this  an- 
nouncement identify  the  Messenger,  who  made  it  di- 
rectly in  person,  with  Jehovah  the  God  of  Israel  and 
administrator  of  the  dispensation.  The  narrative  im- 
mediately ensuing,  refers  to  the  apostasies  and  rebellions 
of  the  people.  ';  They  forsook  the  Lord  God  of  their 
fathers,  which  brought  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
.  .  and  served  Baal  and  Ashtaroth,  and  the  Lord  de- 
livered them  into  the  hands  of  spoilers,  that  spoiled 
them,  and  sold  them  into  the  hands  of  their  enemies 
round  about,  so  that  they  could  not  any  longer  stand 
before  their  enemies.  Whithersoever  they  went  out, 
the  hand  of  the  Lord  was  against  them  for  evil,  as  the 
Lord  had  said,  and  as  the  Lord  had  sworn  unto  them ; 
and  they  were  greatly  distressed.  Nevertheless,  the 
Lord  raised  up  Judges,  which  delivered  them  out  of 
the  hand  of  those  that  spoiled  them.  And  yet  they 
would  not  hearken  unto  their  Judges.  .  .  .  and  when 
the  Lord  raised  them  up  Judges,  then  the  Lord  was 
with  the  Judge,  and  delivered  them." 

In  the  war  against  Sisera,  the  Lord  God  of  Israel 
commanded  what  should  be  done,  and  promised  to  de- 
liver him  into  the  hand  of  Barak.  (Chap.  4  :  6,  7.) 
"And  Deborah  said  unto  Barak,  Up,  for  this  is  the 
day  in  which  the  Lord  hath  delivered  Sisera  into  thine 
hand :  is  not  the  Lord  gone  out  before  thee  ?  And  the 
Lord  discomfited  Sisera."  (V.  14,  15.)  That  He  was 
personally  present,  is  shown  by  a  passage  in  Deborah's 


270  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

song.     The  inhabitants  of  Meroz  had  refused  to  cooper- 
ate with  Barak.     The  Messenger  Jehovah  said :  "  Curse 
ye  Meroz,  curse  ye  bitterly  the  inhabitants  thereof 
because    they   came   not    to   the    help  of   Jehovah." 
(Chap.  5.) 

When  the  children  of  Israel  were  oppressed  and  re- 
duced to  extremities  by  the  Midianites,  the  Messenger 
Jehovah  appeared  personally  and  visibly  to  Gideon, 
and  said :  "  Jehovah  is  with  thee.  .  .  Surely  I  will  be 
with  thee."  To  assure  and  confirm  his  dubious  mind, 
He  accepted  an  offering  from  him,  directed  the  manner 
of  placing  it  on  a  rock,  put  forth  the  staff  that  was  in 
His  hand,  and  there  rose  up  fire  out  of  the  rock,  and 
consumed  the  flesh  and  the  unleavened  cakes.  Gideon 
saw  Him  face  to  face.  He  performed  other  miracles — 
directed  Gideon  to  dispense  with  all  but  three  hun- 
dred of  his  men,  and  instructed  him  how  to  proceed. 
"  And  the  three  hundred  blew  the  trumpets,  and  the 
Lord  set  every  man's  sword  against  his  fellow,  even 
throughout  all  the  host"  of  the  Midianites.  (Chap.  6,  7.) 

The  Messenger  Jehovah  appeared  visibly  in  the  like- 
ness of  man,  to  Manoah  and  his  wife,  to  forewarn  them 
of  the  birth  of  Samson,  and  to  give  the  directions  re- 
quisite to  his  being  a  Nazarite  for  the  special  services 
to  be  performed  by  him.  Manoah  offered  a  sacrifice 
upon  a  rock  to  the  Lord  ....  and  the  Messenger  as- 
cended in  the  flame  of  the  altar  .  .  .  and  Manoah  said, 
we  shall  surely  die  for  we  have  seen  God."  (Chap.  13.) 

On  the  occasion  of  their  war  upon  the  tribe  of  Ben- 
jamin, the  children  of  Israel  repeatedly  asked  and  ob- 
tained immediate  and  specific  directions  from  Jehovah. 
This  no  doubt  was  by  oracular  response  to  the  High 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTUKES.  271 

Priest  from  the  dwelling-place  of  the  official  Person, 
Jehovah  the  Messenger,  within  the  vail  in  the  taber- 
nacle ;  as  was  common  in  emergencies,  from  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Levitical  Priesthood,  to  the  destruction  of 
the  first  Temple.  After  twice  repairing  to  the  station 
of  the  Ark,  receiving  directions,  and  being  defeated, 
"  Then  all  the  children  of  Israel,  and  all  the  people 
went  up,  and  came  unto  the  house  of  God,  and  wept, 
and  sat  there  before  the  Lord,  and  fasted  that  day 
until  even,  and  offered  burnt  offerings  and  peace  offer- 
ings before  the  Lord.  And  the  children  of  Israel  in- 
quired of  the  Lord,  (for  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  God 
was  there  in  those  days,  and  Phineas,  the  son  of  Eleazar, 
the  son  of  Aaron,  stood  before  it  in  those  days,)  say- 
ing :  Shall  I  yet  go  out  to  battle  against  the  children  of 
Benjamin  my  brother,  or  shall  I  cease  ?  And  the  Lord 
said  :  Go  up ;  for  to-morrow  I  will  deliver  them  into 
thine  hand."  (Chap.  20.) 

Thus  far  the  personal  presence,  visible  appearances, 
and  immediate  agency  of  the  Mediatorial  Person,  in 
administering  the  dispensation,  are  shown  to  have  been 
the  same  as  prior  to  the  death  of  Moses.  JSTo  new 
agency,  operative  poiuer,  or  other  instrumentality  was 
introduced.  Nor  was  the  ministry  of  Samuel  and  the 
later  prophets  a  new  or  modifying  feature  of  the  sys- 
tem. It  was  no  novelty,  no  new  agency  or  mode  of 
revelation.  Moses  was  preeminent  as  a  prophet. 
Joshua  uttered  inspired  predictions.  Balaam  had  done 
the  same.  Deborah  was  a  prophetess.  When  subject 
to  the  Midianites,  "  the  Lord  sent  a  prophet  unto  the 
children  of  Israel,  which  said  unto  them,  Thus  saith 
the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  I  brought  you  up  from  Egypt," 


272  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

etc.  (Judges  6.)  This  mode  of  direct  verbal  revela- 
tion to  the  prophets,  and  to  the  people  by  their  repeat- 
ing and  writing  the  same  words,  was  common  to  every 
period  of  the  dispensation.  And  the  evidence  of  the 
local  personal  presence  of  the  Eevealer,  was  the  same 
at  every  period.  His  agency  was  exerted  as  directly 
and  immediately,  as  in  the  miracles  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. His  voice  was  heard  ;  His  Person  was  seen. 

From  the  history  of  Samuel,  it  is  apparent,  that  as  a 
ruler,  and  as  a  prophet,  he  stood  in  the  same  relation 
to  Jehovah  as  Moses  had  done.  He  was  called  in  the 
tabernacle  by  the  audible  voice  of  Him  who  dwelt* 
between  the  cherubim,  and  who  then  announced,  re- 
vealed, to  him,  what  was  to  happen  to  the  house  of 
Eli.  (1  Sam.  3.)  His  narrative  of  the  taking  of  the 
ark  by  the  Philistines,  demonstrates  that  both  they 
and  the  Israelites  believed  that  the  Lord  of  Hosts  was 
present  and  dwelt  with  it.  The  people  brought  "the 
ark  of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts  into  the  camp 
from  Shiloh,  that  it  might  save  them  out  of  the  hand 
of  their  enemies.  The  Philistines  said,  God  is  come 
into  the  camp,  who  smote  the  Egyptians  with  all  the 
plagues  in  the  wilderness.  Wo  unto  us !"  They 
placed  it  in  the  temple  of  Dagon.  The  idol  fell  down 
broken  and  headless  before  it.  They  carried  it  from 
place  to  place ;  but  wherever  it  came  miraculous  in- 
flictions of  disease  and  death  fell  upon  the  people.  At 
length  it  was  miraculously  conducted  back  into  the 
territory  of  Israel.  The  men  of  Beth-Shemesh,  the 
place  to  which  it  was  conveyed,  with  irreverent  and 
impious  curiosity  "  looked  into  the  ark  of  the  Lord, 
and  He  therefore,  even  He,  smote  of  the  people  fifty 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  273 

thousand  and  three  score  and  ten  men  ....  and  the 
men  of  Beth-Shemesh  said,  Who  is  able  to  stand  be- 
fore this  Holy  Lord  God?"  (Chap.  5,  6.)  These 
events  were  followed  by  a  great  reformation  of  the 
Israelites.  The  Philistines  renewed  the  war.  Samuel 
interceded ;  and  "  the  Lord  thundered  with  a  great 
thunder  upon  the  Philistines,  and  discomfited  them, 
and  they  were  smitten."  (Chap.  7.) 

The  subsequent  history  of  Samuel  is  connected  with 
that  of  Saul  and  David,  and  is  fraught  with  records  of 
immediate  revelations  from  Jehovah,  and  immediate 
interpositions  of  His  agency.  The  people  desired  a 
king.  "  The  Lord  said  unto  Samuel,  Hearken  unto 
the  voice  of  the  people.  And  Samuel  told  the  words 
of  the  Lord  unto  the  people.  The  Lord  told  Samuel 
in  his  ear  a  day  before  Saul  came — and  when  Samuel 
saw  Saul,  the  Lord  said  unto  him,  Behold  the  man 
whom  I  spake  to  thee  of.  Samuel  called  the  people 
together  unto  the  Lord  at  Mizpeh,  [where  the  ark  then 
was,]  and  said  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  Thus  saith 
the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  I  brought  up  Israel  out  of 
Egypt,"  etc.  When  Saul  was  publicly  selected  from 
his  tribe  and  family  by  Divine  indication,  he  had  con- 
cealed himself.  "  Therefore  they  inquired  of  the  Lord 
further,  if  the  man  should  yet  come  thither.  And  the 
Lord  answered." — Answered  no  doubt  by  a  voice  from 
the  oracle.  On  that  occasion  Samuel  briefly  refers  to 
the  righteous  acts  of  Jehovah  as  their  Euler,  from  the 
coming  of  Jacob  into  Egypt;  and  to  their  now,  "when 
the  Lord  their  God  was  their  King,"  having  demanded 
a  human  king — that,  like  other  nations,  they  might 
have  a  judge  and  leader  always  visible.  But  he  as- 


274  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

sures  them  of  the  continued  favor  of  Jehovah  if  they 
feared  and  served  Him,  and  obeyed  His  voice,  and 
that  His  hand  should  be  against  them  if  they  rebelled. 
They  had  wickedly  desired  a  king,  as  if  thereby 
to  escape  His  immediate  supervision ;  and  to  impress 
them  with  an  overwhelming  sense  of  His  continued 
agency  and  sovereignty  over  them,  He  sent  thunder 
and  rain,  it  being  the  time  of  harvest,  when  such  a 
phenomenon  was  a  miracle.  The  people  were  terri- 
fied, confessed  their  wickedness  in  desiring  a  king, 
and  begged  Samuel  to  pray  for  them,  that  they  might 
not  die.  "And  Samuel  said  unto  the  people,  Fear 
not ;  ye  have  done  all  this  wickedness,  yet  turn  not 
aside  from  following  the  Lord,  but  serve  the  Lord  with 
all  your  heart ;  and  turn  ye  not  aside,  for  then  should 
ye  go  after  vain  things  [idols]  which  can  not  profit 
nor  deliver  ;  for  they  are  vain.  For  the  Lord  will  not 
forsake  His  people  for  His  great  name's  sake,  because  it 
hath  pleased  the  Lord  to  make  you  His  people.  .  .  . 
Only  fear  the  Lord  and  serve  Him  in  truth  with  all 
your  heart ;  for  consider  how  great  things  He  hath 
done  for  you.  But  if  ye  shall  still  do  wickedly,  ye 
shall  be  consumed,  both  ye  and  your  king."  (Chap. 
7-12.) 

3.  It  thus  appears  that  there  was  no  withdrawment 
on  the  part  of  Jehovah,  nor  discontinuance  of  His  im- 
mediate interpositions  and  revelations.  His  theocratic, 
mediatorial,  covenant  relations  remained  unsuspended 
and  intact ;  and  in  like  manner  they  continued  during 
the  next  five  hundred  years,  down  to  the  destruction 
of  the  temple  and  the  expulsion  of  the  last  king  of 
David's  line  who  sat  upon  his  throne. 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  275 

In  the  progress  of  the  history,  some  two  years  after 
Saul's  induction  into  the  kingly  office,  the  armies  of 
the  Philistines,  with  thirty  thousand  chariots,  made  war 
upon  him  and  invaded  his  kingdom.  He  was  unpre- 
pared. "  The  people  followed  him,  trembling."  He 
called  for  Samuel  to  offer  a  burnt  offering;  but  he 
came  not  at  the  time  appointed.  He  sacrilegiously 
invaded  the  priest's  office,  officiated  at  the  offering 
himself,  violated  the  commandment  of  Jehovah,  and 
was  forewarned  by  Samuel  that  his  reign  should  not 
be  established  and  continued,  but  that  another  had 
been  selected  to  take  his  place.  Nevertheless  Jehovah 
interposed  by  His  own  immediate  agency,  causing  an 
earthquake  for  the  destruction  of  the  Philistines  and 
the  deliverance  of  His  people.  "  There  was  a  trem- 
bling in  the  host,  in  the  field,  and  among  all  the  peo- 
ple ;  the  garrison  and  spoilers,  they  also  trembled,  and 
the  earth  quaked  :  so  it  was  a  very  great  trembling — 
the  multitudes  melted  away,  and  they  went  on  beating- 
down  one  another — so  the  Lord  saved  Israel  that  day." 
(Chap.  14.) 

Jehovah  expressly  designated  David  from  among  the 
sons  of  Jesse  to  be  king.  "  The  Lord  said  to  Samuel, 
Arise,  anoint  him,  for  this  is  he."  When  he  encoun- 
tered Goliath,  the  contest  being  virtually  between  Jeho- 
vah as  Head  and  leader  of  His  people,  and  Baal,  in  whom 
the  Philistines  trusted,  he  said  to  the  champion  of  idol- 
atry: "Thou  comest  to  me  with  a  sword,  and  with  a 
spear,  and  with  a  shield;  but  I  come  to  thee  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  the  God  of  the  armies  of 
Israel,  whom  thou  hast  defied.  This  day  shall  the 
Lord  deliver  thee  into  mine  hand ;  and  I  will  smite 


270  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

thee,  and  take  thine  head  from  thee ;  and  I  will  give 
the  carcasses  of  the  host  of  the  Philistines  this  day  unto 
the  fowls  of  the  air,  and  to  the  wild  beasts  of  the  earth : 
that  all  the  earth  may  know  that  there  is  a  God  in  Israel. 
And  all  this  assembly  shall  know  that  the  Lord  saveth 
not  with  sword  and  spear :  for  the  battle  is  the  Lord's, 
and  He  will  give  you  into  our  hands."  (Chap.  17.) 

After  the  apostasy  of  Saul,  he  received  no  more 
direct  revelations  from  Jehovah.  "  The  Lord  answered 
him  not,  neither  by  dreams,  nor  by  visions,  nor  by 
prophets/'  (Chap.  18.)  But  David,  while  in  exile, 
received  express  verbal  directions  from  time  to  time. 
When  the  Philistines  assailed Keilah,  "David  inquired 
of  the  Lord,  saying,  Shall  I  go  and  smite  these  Philis- 
tines? And  the  Lord  said  unto  David:  Go,  and  smite 
the  Philistines,  and  save  Keilah."  His  men  being 
afraid,  he  inquired  again.  "  And  the  Lord  answered 
him,  and  said :  Go  down  to  Keilah ;  for  I  will  deliver 
the  Philistines  into  their  hand."  The  inquiries  on 
these  and  similar  occasions,  appear  to  have  been  made 
by  David  personally,  without  the  intervention  of  a 
priest;  and  the  record  plainly  imports  that  the  answers 
were  verbally  and  audibly  made  to  him.  After  he 
had  slain  the  Philistines  and  retaken  Keilah,  the  resid- 
ence of  his  family,  he  was  informed  that  Saul  was 
coming  to  destroy  that  city  and  capture  him.  He 
directed  Abiathar  the  priest,  who  had  just  taken 
refuge  with  him,  to  bring  the  ephod.  "Then  said 
David,  O  Lord  God  of  Israel,  .  .  .  will  the  men 
of  Keilah  deliver  me  up  into  Saul's  hand  ?  Will  Saul 
come  down,  as  Thy  servant  hath  heard?  O  Lord 
God  of  Israel,  I  beseech  Thee,  tell  Thy  servant.  And 


OF   THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURES.  277 

the  Lord  said,  He  will  come  down.  Then  said  David, 
Will  the  men  of  Keilah  deliver  me  and  my  men  into 
the  hand  of  Saul  ?  And  the  Lord  said,  They  will 
deliver  thee  up."  (Chap.  23.) 

Again,  when  the  Amalekites  captured  his  family, 
and  destroyed  Ziklag,  "  David  said  to  Abiathar  the 
priest,  I  pray  thee  bring  me  hither  the  ephod.  And 
Abiathar  brought  thither  the  ephod  to  David.  And 
David  inquired  at  the  Lord,  saying,  Shall  I  pursue 
after  this  troop  ?  shall  I  overtake  them  ?  And  He 
answered  him,  Pursue  :  for  thou  shalt  surely  overtake 
them,  and  without  fail  recover  all."  (Chap.  30.)  After 
the  death  of  Saul,  "  David  inquired  of  the  Lord,  saying. 
Shall  I  go  up  into  any  of  the  cities  of  Judah  ?  And 
the  Lord  said  unto  him,  Go  up.  And  David  said, 
Whither  shall  I  go  up  ?  And  He  said,  Unto  Hebron.'' 
(2  Sam.  2.)  After  he  was  proclaimed  King  by  all  the 
tribes,  "  David  went  on  and  grew  great,  and  the  Lord 
God  of  Hosts  was  with  him."  The  Philistines,  hearing 
of  his  accession  to  the  throne,  prepared  to  attack  him. 
"And  David  inquired  of  the  Lord,  saying,  Shall  I  go 
up  to  the  Philistines  ?  Wilt  thou  deliver  them  into 
mine  hand  ?  And  the  Lord  said  unto  David,  Go  up." 
At  a  later  period  the  same  enemy  marched  against 
him.  "And  when  David  inquired  of  the  Lord,  He 
said  ':  -as  if  to  signalize  the  immediate  interposition  of 
His  power — "  Thou  shalt  not  go  up  :  but  fetch  a  com- 
pass behind  them,  and  come  upon  them  over  against 
the  mulberry  trees.  And  let  it  be,  when  thou  nearest 
the  sound  of  a  going  in  the  tops  of  the  mulberry  trees, 
that  then  thou  shalt  bestir  thyself:  for  then  shall  the 


278  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

Lord  go  out  before  thee,  to  smite  the  hosts  of  the  Philis- 
tines."    (Chap.  5.) 

Subsequently — after  David  had  brought  u  the  ark  of 
God,  whose  name  is  called  by  the  name  of  the  Lord  of 
Hosts  that  dwelleth  between  the  cherubim,"  to  Jerusa- 
lem, "  and  set  it  in  its  place,  in  the  midst  of  the  taber- 
nacle that  he  had  pitched  for  it" — the  verbal  direc- 
tions and  revelations  from  Jehovah  were  sometimes 
given  directly  to  him  and  to  those  who  succeeded  to 
his  throne,  but  more  commonly  to  the  prophets.  Thus 
having  brought  the  ark  to  Jerusalem,  and  being  at 
peace  with  the  surrounding  nations,  he  desired  to  build 
an  house  for  the  ark  as  the  dwelling-place  of  Jehovah. 
And  "the  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  Nathan,  saying, 
Go  and  tell  my  servant  David,  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
Shalt  thou  build  me  an  house  for  me  to  dwell  in? 
Whereas  I  have  not  dwelt  in  any  house  since  the  time 
that  I  brought  up  the  children  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt 
even  to  this  day,  but  have  walked  in  a  tent  and  in  a 
tabernacle.  In  all  the  places  wherein  I  have  walked 
with  all  the  children  of  Israel  spake  I  a  word  with  any 
of  the  tribes  of  Israel,  whom  I  commanded  to  feed  my 
people  Israel,  saying,  Why  build  ye  not  me  an  house 
of  cedar  .  .  .  according  to  all  these  words  ...  so  did 
Nathan  speak  unto  David.  Then  went  King  David 
in,  [to  the  tabernacle,]  and  sat  before  the  Lord."  In 
the  prayer  and  thanksgiving  which  follow,  David  says  : 
"  Thou  hast  confirmed  to  Thyself  Thy  people  Israel,  to 
be  a  people  unto  Thee  forever."  And  "  Thou,  O  Lord 
of  Hosts,  God  of  Israel,  hast  revealed  to  Thy  servant, 
saying,  I  will  build  thee  an  house."  (Chap.  7.) 

With  those  who  allegorize  or  spiritualize  such  pas- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  279 

sages  of  Scripture  as  this  or  any  of  those  before  quoted, 
and  make  the  ordinary  words  of  human  language,  as 
spoken  by  Jehovah  Himself,  mean  one  thing  when  they 
describe  His  actions,  and  another  when  they  describe 
the  actions  of  men,  we  decline  having  any  controversy. 
We  believe  that  He  employed  the  words  which  He 
spoke,  as  a  perfect  vehicle  and  expression  of  His 
thoughts,  and  in  the  same  sense  that  men  employed 
them ;  and  caused  them  to  be  written  that  men  might 
infallibly  know  what  they  should  believe  concerning 
Him,  and  what  duties  He  requires  of  them.  And  we 
accordingly  believe  that  in  His  delegated  character  and 
mediatorial  Person,  He  created  the  worlds,  was  person- 
ally and  locally  present  in  Eden;  conversed  with 
Adam,  Noah,  the  Patriarchs,  Moses,  and  the  prophets ; 
visibly  appeared  on  earth  in  that  character  and  Person 
at  different  times  and  places ;  dwelt  in  the  pillar  of 
cloud — in  the  tabernacle  of  witness,  and  in  the  Temple  ; 
and  by  His  immediate  Personal  agency  administered 
the  primeval  and  Levitical  dispensations.  We  believe 
this  for  the  same  reason  that  we  believe  that  in  the 
same  character  and  Person  he  became  incarnate,  and 
walked  and  conversed  with  men  ;  namely,  because  the 
facts  are  as  plainly  expressed  in  His  words  and  by  His 
inspiration  in  the  one  case,  as  in  the  other. 

The  obscurity  in  the  English,  and  in  the  other  ver- 
sions of  the  Old  Testament,  from  that  of  the  Seventy 
to  the  present  time,  in  respect  to  the  names  and  official 
designations,  and  'the  continuous  Personal  agency  and 
administration  of  the  delegated  One — the  Messenger  of 
the  eternal  covenant — is  owing,  for  the  most  part,  pro- 
bably first  to  the  example  of  the  Jewish  translators  of  the 


280  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

Septuagint ;  who,  inheriting  their  theology  from  the 
Jews  posterior  to  the  captivity,  entertaining  the  senti- 
ments concerning  the  Messiah  which  prevailed  at  the 
period  of  His  advent,  and  desiring  not  to  offend,  but 
to  please  the  Egyptians,  Greeks,  and  other  heathens, 
would  naturally  exclude,  or  as  far  as  possible  obscure, 
the  titulary  and  personal  references  to  His  character  and 
agency.      Secondly,   to  the   hereditary  Jewish   senti- 
ments and  prejudices  of  Jerome,  the  founder  of  the 
Yulgate,  whose  translation  from  the  Hebrew  closely 
followed  the   Rabbinical   interpretations  of  his  time. 
Thirdly.    To  the  undue  influence  of  the  Rabbinical  and 
Masoretic  constructions  and  comments,  on  the  minds 
of  more  recent  translators.     Hence,  to  cite  no  other 
instance,  the  Hebrew  term  which  is  translated  angel, 
as  the  proper  name  of  a  created  being,  instead  of  its 
being  rendered  Messenger,  as  a  name  of  office,  when  it 
is  coupled  and  employed   interchangeably   with    the 
name  Jehovah,  may  be  traced  through  the  modern  and 
the  earlier  versions  up  to  that  of  the  Seventy.     It  is, 
we  think,  largely  owing  to  the  obscurity  thus  occa- 
sioned, that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  are, 
with  respect  to  this  subject,  regarded  and  represented 
as  so  inexplicit,  enigmatical,  mystical,  as  to  be  intelli- 
gible only  by  means  of  the  clearer  revelations  of  the 
Gospel ;  their  types  and  shadows  concealing  the  dim 
rays  of  light  which  are  supposed  to  have  guided  the  un- 
paralleled faitj^of  Patriarchs  and  Prophets  ;  as  though 
the  veil  which  was  on  the  uncircumcised  Jewish  heart, 
had  been  extended  over  the  speculative  Gentile  mind, 
with  the  added  films  of  Rabbinical  stolidity  and  ration- 
alistic  criticism ;    preventing    a   discernment   of    the 


OF  THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURES.  281 

characteristics,  prerogatives,  names  and  designations  of 
the  Messiah,  the  great  theme  of  Moses  and  the 
Prophets ;  and  concealing  the  broad  line  of  His  Per- 
sonal agency  throughout  the  successive  dispensations. 

During  His  ministry  after  His  incarnation,  He  con- 
stantly referred   His  hearers  who  did  not   infer  His 
claims,  either  from  His  titles  or  His  works,  to  the  He- 
brew Scriptures,  as  testifying  at  large  of  Him  ;  to  what 
Moses  and  the  Prophets  wrote,  as  being  written   of 
Him ;  to  the  announcements  and  predictions  uttered 
by  His  own  voice — when  signified  by  designations  that 
bespoke  Him  simply  as  Divine — concerning  His  official 
Person,  agency,  and  relations.    In  His  character  simply 
as  Divine,  and  as  such  invisible,  He  spoke  to  and  of 
Himself  as  the  delegated,  anointed,  official  Person — the 
Messenger,  the  Son,  who  appeared  visibly  to  patriarchs 
and  prophets,  the  seed  of  the  woman,  the  son  of  David, 
the  King,  the  Saviour,  the  Eedeemer,  the  Holy  One  of 
Israel,  the  Branch,  the  Shepherd,  Immanuel,  who  was 
to  become  incarnate ;  as  when  He  had  taken  the  hu- 
man nature  into  union  with  His  Person,  whatever  is 
affirmed  of  Him  that  is  predicable  only  of  one  of  His 
two  distinct  natures,  is  affirmed  of  Him  as  a  Person. 
It  was  that  official,  delegated  Person,  "who  took  on 
Him  the  seed  of  Abraham,"  and  became  "  perfect  as 
the  Captain  of  Salvation  through  sufferings."     In  that 
delegated  character,  before  Abraham  was,  He  was.     In 
that  official,  Personal  character,  He  was  Prophet,  Priest 
and  King,  Eevealer,  Mediator  and  Ruler,  as  truly  be- 
fore as  after  His  incarnation.     As  such,  to  Him  the 
prayers  of  the  Patriarchs  and  prophets  were,  perhaps 
exclusively,  addressed,  as,  at  the  opening  of  the  new 


282  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

dispensation,  were  those  of  the  disciples,  Stephen,  Paul, 
and  others.  To  Him  the  patriarchal  and  Levitical 
altars  were  erected,  and  the  sacrifices  offered.  He  was 
the  immediate  object  of  faith,  homage,  and  obedience. 
In  respect  to  all  Personal  and  providential  manifesta- 
tions, interpositions,  and  operations,  He  was  ^the  actor. 
This  is  the  only  legitimate  conclusion  to  be  derived 
from  the  language  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  in 
their  connection  with  each  other ;  from  the  covenant 
of  which  He  was  the  Mediator  from  the  foundation  of 
the  world ;  from  His  offices  as  Prophet,  Priest,  and 
King  ;  from  His  names  and  official  designations  ;  from 
His  relations  to  His  chosen  people,  the  Church,  which 
He,  as  if  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  re- 
deemed and  saved — and  to  the  successive  covenants, 
promises,  and  predictions  which  He  fulfilled  and  is  still 
fulfilling ;  and  from  the  nature,  scope,  and  design  of 
His  entire  undertaking  in  His  delegated  character.  If 
in  that  character  He  appeared  and  acted  at  all,  then 
He  was  the  actor  throughout  the  ancient  dispensations. 
If  in  that  character  He  expiated,  "  by  himself  purged," 
our  sins,  then  in  that  character  He  made  the  world, 
and  is  heir  of  all  things ;  and  to  Him  of  old  the  Father 
said,  "  Thou  art  my  Son ;"  and  "  Thy  throne,  0  God  ! 
is  forever  and  ever  ...  and  thou  Lord,  in  the  begin- 
ning hast  laid  the  foundation  of  the  earth,  and  the 
heavens  are  the  works  of  thy  hands ;"  as  at  a  later 
period  He  said :  "  This  is  my  beloved  Son,  hear  ye 
Him."  "For  by  Him  were  all  things  created,  that  are 
in  heaven,  and  that  are  in  earth,  visible  and  invisible 
...  all  things  were  created  by  Him  and  for  Him,  and 
He  is  before  all  things,  and  by  Him  all  things  consist. 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  283 

.  .  .  For  it  pleased  the  Father  that  in  Him  should  all 
fullness  dwell."  But  in  all  His  delegated  agency  He 
spoke  the  words  and  did  the  things  prescribed  and  ap- 
pointed by  the  Father .  doing  as  a  delegate,  His  will 
in  all  things.  At  the  same  time  the  Holy  Spirit  had 
from  the  Father  an  official  mission  and  agency  in  car- 
rying out  the  work  of  Mediation  and  Redemption.  He 
is  represented  as  being  sent,  and  having  an  office  work — 
renewing,  enlightening,  sanctifying  men  —  applying 
the  benefits  of  the  redemption  purchased  by  Christ — 
speaking  in  the  prophets  and  apostles — inspiring  into 
their  minds  what  was  to  be  written — bringing  to  their 
remembrance  what  had  been  spoken  to  them.  His 
Personally  official  agency  in  the  great  scheme  of  infi- 
nite wisdom,  goodness,  and  grace  towards  men,  is  no 
less  distinctively  exhibited  in  the  Scriptures,  than  that 
of  the  Redeemer.  And  in  order  to  an  intelligent  view 
of  the  Divine  economy  as  revealed  in  the  Scriptures 
and  realized  in  the  works  of  providence  and  grace,  it 
is  important  to  consider,  that  with  respect  to  that  econo- 
my and  those  works,  the  relations  and  acts  of  the  re- 
spective Persons  of  the  Godhead  are  official — founded 
in  reciprocal  covenant  engagements.  As  Persons,  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  are  coequal  and 
coeternaL  They  are  revealed  to  us  in  connection  with 
those  works,  and  in  the  relations  which  they  sustain  to 
them,  and  to  each  other  in  connection  with  them ;  and 
conformably  to  the  covenant  and  economy  in  which 
those  relations  and  works  are  founded,  the  designations 
by  which  they  are  respectively  made  known,  are  offi- 
cial designations,  employed  with  a  Personal  and  offi- 
cial reference.  The  Father  sends,  delegates,  commis- 


284  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

sions  the  Son,  to  accomplish  certain  works.  The  Son 
reveals  the  Father  and  executes  His  will.  The  Holy 
Spirit  exerts  His  agency  in  conformity  with  the  will  of 
the  Father  and  the  Son.  It  is  in  these  relations  that 
the  respective  Persons  are  worshipped,  and  not  jointly, 
or  as  a  unity.  These  relations  must  be  conceived  of  as 
coeval  in  their  origin  with  the  objects  of  them.  In 
their  nature  the  Three  Persons  are  equal.  The  subor- 
dination of  the  second  and  third  must  have  been  vol- 
untarily assumed  for  special  purposes  and  agencies 
which  required  it.  When  creatures  were  to  be  brought 
into  existence,  relations  not  previously  existing  were 
required ;  and  as  relations  to  creatures  required  various 
agencies  of  the  respective  Persons,  new  relations  be- 
tween them  were  requisite,  which,  being  founded  in 
compact,  are  properly  termed  official.  Accordingly  all 
Divine  acts  towards  creatures  are  Personal  acts  of  the 
Father,  the  Son,  or  the  Holy  Spirit.  Hence  all  the 
acts  of  the  Son  in  the  works  of  creation,  providence, 
and  redemption,  are  ascribed  to  Him  in  His  delegated 
character,  by  whatever  designations  He  may  be  referred 
to  in  connection  with  those  works  ;  and  it  was  accord- 
ingly in  that  official  character  that  He  appeared  Per- 
sonally and  visibly  in  the  ancient  dispensations,  as- 
sumed the  human  form,  and  performed  various  acts 
proper  only  to  one  in  that  form.  The  nature  of  His 
delegated  undertaking,  and  the  objects  of  those  dispen- 
sations, required  such  local  and  visible  Personal  mani- 
festations and  agencies,  and  also  that  He  should  speak 
to  and  of  Himself  in  the  aspects  and  relations  in  which 
He  appeared,  and  in  which  He  exercised  His  Prophetic 
office  in  respect  to  His  future  coming,  and  His  sacer- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  285 

dotal  work.  (See  "The  Messiah  in  Moses  and  the 
Prophets.")  In  like  manner  the  acts  of  the  Holy  Spi- 
rit— that  of  inspiring  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred 
writers  what  they  were  to  commit  to  writing,  as  well 
as  others — are  ascribed  to  Him  as  official  acts. 

Let  it  also  be  considered,  as  preliminary  to  a  further 
citation  of  evidences  of  the  continued  Personal  Presence, 
and  immediate  agency  of  the  Messenger  Jehovah,  during 
the  continuance  of  the  Davidic  line  of  kings — that  the 
Divine  Persons  are  designated  not  only  by  their  official 
titles,  but  are  respectively  addressed  and  spoken  of  by 
each  of  the  denominatives  which  are  employed  as 
proper  names  ;  and  as  they  are  one  in  essence  and  in 
will,  though  Personally  three,  the  acts  of  each,  being 
alike  Divine,  are  in  Scripture  exhibited  as  the  acts  of 
God.  When  severally  addressed  by  the  Names  which 
are  alike  denominatives  of  each,  the  context  indicates 
which  official  Person  is  referred  to. 

These  considerations  are  the  more  necessary  as  we 
approach  the  culminating  period  of  the  Theocratic  rule, 
and  the  Levitical  institutions,  which  was  characterized 
by  more  frequent  and  signal  revelations,  inspirations, 
interpositions,  and  judgments,  with  the  progress  of 
apostasy  and  corruption.  Within  the  memorable  period 
of  about  five  hundred  years  yet  to  be  surveyed,  most 
of  the  Psalms  and  of  the  prophecies  were  written  ;  the 
Temple  was  erected,  and  was  long  the  acknowledged 
scene  of  the  Divine  Presence,  and  of  acceptable  homage 
and  praise  from  the  people,  and  then  alternately  of  rev- 
erence and  sacrilege  ;  ten  of  the  tribes  apostatized"  and 
were  cast  off ;  the  two  followed  their  example  of  wicked- 
ness, and  were  driven  from  the  land  of  their  inheritance ; 


286  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

the  temple  was  destroyed  with  the  ark  and  its  furniture ; 
Jehovah  then  withdrew  and  discontinued  His  theo- 
cratic relations.  The  evidences  of  His  continued  Per- 
sonal Presence  and  immediate  agency,  up  to  that  time, 
are  altogether  too  multiplied  to  "be  cited  in  detail.  The 
briefest  reference  to  a  portion  of  them  that  is  compatible 
with  the  object  of  referring  to  them,  must  suffice,  and 
the  selection  must  be  made  without  special  regard  to 
their  chronological  order. 

Passing  other  instances  of  direct  and  prophetic 
revelation  to  David  during  the  progress  of  his 
reign,  we  refer  to  his  numbering  the  people  and 
the  immediate  personal  interposition  of  the  Mes- 
senger Jehovah,  by  which  seventy  thousand  men 
were  destroyed ;  the  victims  being  selected  from  all 
parts  of  the  kingdom.  "  When  the  Messenger 
stretched  out  His  hand  upon  Jerusalem  to  destroy  it, 
the  Lord  repented  Him  of  the  evil,  and  said  to  the 
Messenger  that  destroyed  the  people,  It  is  enough : 
stay  now  thine  hand.  And  the  Messenger  Jehovah 
was  by  the  threshing  floor  of  Arannah  the  Jebusite. 
And  David  spake  unto  the  Lord  when  he  saw  the 
Messenger  that  smote  the  people,  and  said,  Lo !  I  have 
sinned  and  I  have  done  wickedly."  (2  Sam.  24.)  In  the 
parallel  account  (1  Chron.  21,)  it  is  said  that  "  God  sent 
the  Messenger  [after  the  pestilence  had  done  its  work 
throughout  the  land]  unto  Jerusalem  to  destroy  it.  ... 
And  David  lifted  up  his  eyes,  and  saw  the  Messenger 
Jehovah  stand  between  the  earth  and  the  heaven,  hav- 
ing a  drawn  sword  in  his  hand  stretched  out  over  Jeru- 
salem. Then  David  and  the  Elders,  clothed  in  sack- 
cloth, fell  upon  their  faces.  And  David  said  unto 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCKIPTUKES.  287 

God  .  .  .  even  I  it  is  that  have  sinned  and  done  evil 
Then  the  Messenger  Jehovah  commanded  Gad  to 
say  to  David;  that  David  should  go  up,  and  set  up  an 
altar  unto  the  Lord  in  the  threshing  floor  of  Oman 
[Araunah]  the  Jebusite.  And  David  went  up  at  the 
saying  of  Gad  which  he  spake  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  [that  is  of  the  Lord,  the  Messenger]  and  Oman 
saw  the  Messenger,  .  .  .  and  David  built  there  [the 
site  of  the  future  temple]  an  altar  unto  the  Lord,  and 
offered  burnt  offerings  and  peace  offerings,  and  called 
upon  the  Lord,  and  He  answered  him  ~by  fire  upon  the 
altar  of  burnt  offering.  And  the  Lord  commanded  the 
Messenger ;  and  He  put  up  His  sword  again  into  the 
sheath  thereof.  .  .  .  When  David  saw  that  the  Lord 
had  answered  him  on  the  threshing  floor  of  Oman  the 
Jebusite,  then  [thenceforth]  he  sacrificed  there.  For 
the  tabernacle  of  the  Lord,  which  Moses  made  in  the 
wilderness,  and  the  altar  of  the  burnt  offering,  were  at 
that  season  in  the  high  place  at  Gibeon.  But  David 
could  not  go  before  it  to  inquire  of  God  :  for  he  was 
afraid  because  of  the  sword  of  the  Messenger  Jehovah." 
This  we  take  to  be  a  clear  case  in  which  the  Second 
Person  of  the  Adorable  Trinity  in  His  delegated  cha- 
racter, spoke,  as  invisible,  under  the  name  Jehovah, 
to  and  of  Himself  as  the  Messenger  visible  in  the  like- 
ness of  that  form  in  which  He  was  to  become  incarnate ; 
when  the  two  natures  being  united  in  His  one  Person, 
the  human  would  be  visible  and  the  Divine  remain 
invisible.  Of  this  the  propriety  is  as  apparent  as  the  ne- 
cessity. That  official  Person  conducted  the  administra- 
tion by  His  immediate  agency,  ordinarily  as  invisibly 
present  in  the  Tabernacle  or  at  other  stations,  but  on 


288  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

special  occasions  of  revelation  and  of  public  and  visible 
interpositions,  as  visibly  present,  in  the  likeness  of 
man — one  sent — the  Messenger — the  visible  executor 
of  threatened  judgments.  The  official  Person,  in  His 
Divine  nature  invisible,  audibly  directed  the  visible 
Messenger  who  thus  appeared  to  the  view  of  those  con- 
cerned, in  the  form  of  man.  The  same  official  Person  in 
the  visible  form  of  man,  directed  God  the  prophet.  Re- 
garded in  these  two  aspects,  the  one  Person  is  designat- 
ed by  names  and  titles  in  conformity  with  His  official 
acts  ;  and  on  the  occasions  of  His  visible  appearance 
as  to  Jacob,  Manoah,  Gideon,  and  others,  He  is  ad- 
dressed both  by  the  Divine  Names  and  by  His  official 
titles. 

The  Psalms  of  David  abound  in  evidences  that  it 
was  Jehovah  in  His  delegated  character  to  whom 
David's  prayers  and  praises  were  addressed  ;  and  that 
his  apprehensions  of  that  Divine  Person  respected  Him 
as  having  the  same  attributes  as  when  visibly  incarnate. 
The  allusions  in  these  inspired  compositions,  to  His 
Person,  to  His  local  presence  and  visibility,  to  His  hu- 
man sympathies,  self-denials  and  sufferings,  in  most  in- 
timate connection  with  His  omniscience,  His  almighty 
power,  His  covenant  engagements  and  relations,  His 
prophetic  and  sacerdotal  work,  His  regal  majesty,  His 
triumph  as  Eedeemer,  His  glorious  perfections,  His 
faithfulness,  righteousness,  and  truth — all  attest  the 
reality  of  His  continued  local  presence  in  Zion,  and 
His  immediate  agency  in  the  administration  of  His 
government  and  providence  over  His  people.  In  these 
sacred  lyrics  every  species  of  style  and  composition 
is  employed;  and  as  illustrative  of  His  delegated 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  289 

covenant  relations  and  agencies,  the 'Psalmist  in  his 
regal  office  and  in  the  vicissitudes  and  extremes  of  his 
personal  experience,  is  made  to  represent  Him,  in  con- 
nection with  retrospective  allusions  and  prophetic  re- 
ferences and  announcements ;  or  rather  as  if  personat- 
ed by  the  Psalmist,  He,  often,  not  to  sa}r  always  or 
generally,  is  Himself  the  Speaker.  (See  Psalms,  22, 
35,  40,  45,  46,  47,  48,  50,  56,  57,  86,  88 :  and  with  re- 
ference more  especially  to  His  exaltation,  2,  24,  45,  95, 
96,  97,  98,  100,  110. 

These  and  many  others  contemplate  Him  in  His 
official  character  and  relations,  as  if  the  human  nature 
were  actually  united  with  his  Person,  as  the  immediate 
object  of  homage  and  praise,  or  as  a  suppliant  in  His 
incarnate  and  suffering  state ;  and  as  having  His  local 
habitation  in  the  tabernacle  or  temple  as  Prophet, 
Priest,  and  King.  A  few  citations  from  Psalms  which, 
expressly  connect  His  past,  present,  and  future 
agency  in  the  same  delegated  capacity,  will  sustain  our 
view  of  His  continued  Personal  Presence. 

Thus  (Psalm  68)  on  the  occasion  of  David's  remov- 
ing the  ark  to  Mount  Zion  :  "  Let  God  arise,  let  His 

enemies   be   scattered Sing   unto   God,    sing 

praises  to  his  name :  extol  Him  that  rideth  upon  the 
heavens  by  His  name  JAH,  and  rejoice  before  Him. 
A  Father  of  the  fatherless,  and  a  Judge  of  the  widows, 
is  God  in  His  holy  habitation.  .  .  .  O  God,  when  thou 
wentest  forth  before  Thy  people,  when  Thou  didst  march 
through  the  wilderness :  the  earth  shook,  the  heavens  also 
dropped  at  the  presence  of  God  ;  Sinai  itself  was  moved  at 
the  presence  of  God,  the  God  of  Israel.  .  .  .  The  hill  of 
God  is  as  the  hill  of  Bashan.  .  .  .  This  is  the  hill 

13 


290  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

[Mount  Zion]  which.  God  desireth  to  dwell  in ;  yea, 
Jehovah  will  dwell  in  it  forever.  The  chariots  of  God 
are  twenty  thousand,  even  thousands  of  angels:  the 
Lord  [the  Adonai,  a  title  of  the  Messiah]  is  among 
them  as  in  Sinai,  in  the  holy  place.  Thou  hast 
ascended  on  high.  Thou  hast  led  captivity  captive- 
Thou  hast  received  gifts  for  men ;  yea,  for  the  rebel- 
lious also,  that  the  Lord  God  might  dwell  among  them. 
[The  speaker  is  Christ,  see  Ephesians,  4  :  7,  10.] 
Blessed  be  the  Adonai^  who  daily  loadeth  us  with  bene- 
fits, even  the  God  of  our  salvation.  He  that  is  our  God, 
is-  the  God  of  salvation ;  and  unto  God,  the  Adonai, 
belong  the  issues  from  death.  .  .  .  The  Adonai  said, 
I  will  bring  my  people  again  from  the  depths  of  the  sea. 
.  .  .  They  have  seen  thy  goings,  0  God ;  even  the  goings 
of  my  God,  my  king  in  the  sanctuary.  The  singers  went 
before,  the  players  on  instruments  followed.  .  .  .  Bless 
ye  God  in  the  congregations,  even  the  Adonai,  from 
the  fountain  of  Israel.  .  .  .  Sing  unto  God,  ye  king- 
doms of  the  earth  ;  0  sing  praises  unto  the  Adonai." 

Again,  (Psalm  132,)  on  the  same  occasion:  "Arise, 
O  Lord,  into  thy  rest,  Thou  and  the  ark  of  Thy 
strength.  Let  Thy  priests  be  clothed  with  righteous- 
ness ;  and  let  Thy  saints  shout  for  joy.  For  Thy  ser- 
vant David's  sake,  turn  not  away  the  face  of  Thine 
anointed,  [the  Messiah.]  The  Lord  hath  sworn  in 
truth  unto  David ;  He  will  not  turn  from  it ;  of  the 

fruit  of  Thy  body  will  I  set  on  Thy  throne For 

the  Lord  hath  chosen  Zion  ;  He  hath  desired  it  for  His 
habitation.  This  is  my  rest  forever ;  here  will  I  dwell ; 
for/  have  desired  it." 

Among  the  last  acts  of  David,  on  the  occasion  of 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  291 

presenting  his  offerings  and  those  of  the  people  towards 
the  building  of  the  Temple,  he  said:  "  Thine,  0  Lord, 
is  the  greatness,  and  the  power,  and  the  glory,  and  the 
victory,  and  the  majesty ;  for  all  that  is  in  the  heavens 
and  in  the  earth  is  thine :  Thine  is  the  kingdom,  O  Lord, 
and  Thou  art  exalted  as  Head  over  all.  Both  riches 
and  honor  come  of  Thee,  and  Thou  reignest  over  all ; 
and  in  Thine  hand  is  powe  rand  might ;  and  in  Thine 
hand  it  is  to  make  great  and  to  give  strength  unto  all. 
.  .  .  Then  Solomon  sat  on  the  throne  of  the  Lord  as  King, 
instead  of  David  his  father."  (1  Chron.  29.)  Solomon 
having  presented  burnt  offerings  on  the  "  altar  before 
the  Lord.  .  .  .  God  appeared  to  him  and  said,  Ask  what 
I  shall  give  thee.  And  Solomon  said  unto  God,  Thou 
hast  shewn  great  mercy  unto  David  my  father,  and 
hast  made  me  to  reign  in  his  stead.  Now,  O  Lord 
God  !  let  thy  promise  unto  David  my  father  be  estab- 
lished .  .  .  give  me  now  wisdom  and  knowledge.  .  .  . 
And  God  said  to  Solomon  .  .  .  wisdom  and  knowledge 
is  granted  unto  thee."  (2  Chron.  1.)  When  he  had 
completed  the  Temple,  and  brought  into  it  the  ark 
of  the  covenant  of  the  Lord,  "Then  the  house 
was  filled  with  a  cloud,  even  the  house  of  the  Lord  .  .  . 
for  the  glory  of  the  Lord  had  filled  the  house  of  God. 
Then  said  Solomon,  The  Lord  hath  said  He  would 
dwell  in  the  thick  darkness.  But  I  have  built  an 
house  of  habitation  for  Thee,  and  a  place  for  Thy  dwell- 
ing forever.  .  .  .  Blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Israel,  who 
hath  with  His  hands  fulfilled  that  which  He  spake  with 
His  mouth  to  my  father  David,  saying,  Since  the  day 
that  I  brought  forth  My  people  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt,  I  chose  no  city  among  all  the  tribes  of  Israel  to 


292  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

build  an  house  in.  ...  But  I  have  chosen  Jerusalem.  .  . 
Now  then,  0  Lord  God  of  Israel,  let  Thy  word  be  veri- 
fied which  Thou  hast  spoken  unto  Thy  servant  David. 
But  will  God  in  very  deed  dioell  with  men  on  the  earth  V 
— a  question  equivalent  to  the  strongest  affirmation. 
"  Behold,  heaven  and  the  heaven  of  heavens  can  not  con- 
tain Thee:  how  much  less  this  house  which  I  have 
built.  .  .  .  Now,  my  God,  let,  I  beseech  thee,  Thine  eyes 
be  open,  and  let  Thine  ears  be  attent  unto  the  prayer 
that  is  made  in  this  place.  Now  therefore  arise,  0  Lord 
God,  into  Thy  resting  place,  Thou,  and  the  ark  of  Thy 
strength."  (Chap.  5;  6.) 

These  prayers  are  addressed  to  Him  who  in  His 
official  character  conducted  the  children  of  Israel  out 
of  Egypt,  and  dwelt  in  the  thick  darkness  of  the  pillar 
of  cloud,  That  His  universal  presence  as  Divine  was 
known  and  often  referred  to  by  the  patriarchs,  prophets, 
and  others,  from  the  beginning,  is  as  evident  as  that 
they  had  any  conception  of  His  omniscience  or  other 
attributes ;  and  that  they  distinguished  between  that 
Omnipresence,  and  his  local  presence  when  He  ap- 
peared visibly,  is  no  less  manifest.  Though  the  word 
heaven  is  often  employed  with  immediate  reference  to 
the  most  holy  place  in  the  Tabernacle,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary so  to  restrict  it  here.  As  Divine,  He  is  ever  in 
the  heaven  of  heavens.  His  presence  fills  immensity. 
He  is  God.  Yet,  as  in  His  delegated  character  He  was 
personally  and  locally  present  on  earth  when  literally 
incarnate,  so  He  was  locally  present  when  executing 
the  same  official  work  in  the  previous  dispensations. 
If  there  was  mystery  in  this,  it  could  have  been  no 
greater  than  when  He  tabernacled  in  flesh,  and  in- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  293 

structed  His  disciples — "  that  He  proceeded  forth  and 
came  from  God — that  He  came  down  from  heaven — 
that  He  came  forth  from  the  Father  and  came  into  the 
world,  and  should  leave  the  world  and  go  to  the  Father — 
that  He  should  depart  out  of  this  world  unto  the  Fa- 
ther— that  He  should  go  His  way  to  Him  that  sent 
Him — that  no  man  had  ascended  up  to  heaven,  but 
He  that  came  down  from  heaven,  even  the  Son  of  man 
which  is  in  heaven — that  [in  respect  to  His  Deity]  he 
that  had  seen  Him  had  seen  the  Father — that  He  and 
the  Father  were  one — that  officially  the  Father  was  su- 
perior to  Him — that  they  should  see  the  Son  of  man. 
the  delegated  Person,  ascend  up  where  He  was  before." 
These  and  the  like  passages,  especially  the  entire  17th 
Chapter  of  John,  clearly  exhibit  the  two  aspects  in 
which  in  His  official  character  and  agency  He  was  ever 
regarded  by  all  who  were  taught  of  God  to  know  Him, 
and  in  which,  both  when  visible  and  when  invisible, 
He  of  necessity  spoke  to  and  of  Himself. 

"And  the  Lord  appeared  to  Solomon  by  night,  and 
said  unto  him,  I  have  heard  thy  prayer,  and  have 
chosen  this  place  to  Myself  for  a  house  of  sacrifice.  If 
I  shut  up  heaven  that  there  be  no  rain,  or  if  I  com- 
mand the  locusts  to  devour  the  land,  or  if  I  send  pesti- 
lence among  My  people ;  if  My  people  which  are  called 
by  My  name,  shall  humble  themselves,  and  pray,  and 
seek  My  face,  and  turn  from  their  wicked  ways  ;  then 
will  I  hear  from  heaven,  and  will  forgive  their  sin,  and 
will  heal  their  land.  Now  Mine  eyes  shall  be  open, 
and  Mine  ears  attent  unto  the  prayer  that  is  made  in 
this  place.  For  now  have  I  chosen  and  sanctified 
this  house,  that  My  NAME  may  be  there  forever ;  and 


294  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

Mine  eyes  and  my  heart  shall  be  there  perpetually." 
(2  Chron.  7.)  His  Name  signifies  His  manifested  nature 
or  attributes — His  Personal  Presence. 

Between  the  death  of  Solomon  and  the  destruction 
of  the  Temple,  a  period  of  about  three  hundred  and 
ninety  years,  there  were  in  the  line  of  David  twenty 
Kings  of  Judah :  and  between  the  revolt  of  the  ten 
tribes  under  Jeroboam  and  the  overthrow  of  Israel, 
about  two  hundred  and  fifty  years,  there  were  eighteen 
Kings  of  Israel.  The  events  to  be  noticed  during  these 
periods  have  relation  more  or  less  to  both  kingdoms. 
On  the  accession  of  Rehoboam,  the  ten  tribes  openly 
apostatized  to  idolatry.  He  raised  an  army  and  pur- 
posed to  attack  and  regain  them.  "  But  the  word  of 
Grod  came  to  Shemaiah,  the  man  of  God,  saying,  Speak 
unto  Rehoboam,  the  son  of  Solomon,  King  of  Judah, 
and  unto  all  the  house  of  Judah  and  Benjamin  and  to 
the  remnant  of  the  people,  saying,  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
Ye  shall  not  go  up,  nor  fight  against  your  brethren 
the  children  of  Israel ;  return  every  man  to  his  house  ; 
for  this  thing  is  from  Me.  They  hearkened,  therefore,  to 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  returned  to  depart  according 
to  the  word  of  the  Lord."  Here,  as  in  most  instances 
of  direct  verbal  revelations  from  Jehovah,  whether 
with  or  without  the  intervention  of  a  prophet,  the 
words  spoken  by  Him  were,  beyond  a  doubt,  the  same 
identical  words  which  are  written ;  and  in  style  and 
idiom,  they  often  exhibit  what  our  author  terms  the 
*  human  element '  as  strikingly  as  the  recorded  lan- 
guage of  mere  human  speakers.  On  a  subsequent  oc- 
casion, when  Rehoboam  had  forsaken  the  Law,  and 
was  attacked  by  Shishak,  King  of  Egypt,  the  same 


OF   THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  295 

prophet  was  sent  to  say :  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Ye 
have  forsaken  me,  and  therefore  have  I  also  left  you 
in  the  hand  of  Shishak.  .  .  .  And  when  the  Lord  saw 
that  they  humbled  themselves,  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  Shemaiah,  saying,  They  have  humbled  them- 
selves ;  therefore  I  will  not  destroy  them."  (1  Kings  14.) 

After  the  death  of  Eehoboam,  his  son  and  successor, 
Abijah,  with  an  army  of  400,000  men,  made  war  on 
Jeroboam,  whose  army  numbered  800,000.  Prior  to 
battle  Abijah  addressed  the  ten  tribes  and  their  king, 
charging  them  with  their  apostasy,  vindicating  himself 
and  his  people,  and  concluding  in  these  significant 
terms:  "Behold  God  himself  is  with  us  for  ov.r  Captain, 
and  His  priests  with  sounding  trumpets  to  cry  alarm 
against  you.  0  children  of  Israel !  fight  ye  not  against 
the  Lord  God  of  your  fathers ;  for  ye  shall  not  pros- 
per." The  result  was,  "  that  God  smote  Jeroboam  and 
all  Israel  before  Abijah,  and  Judah  ...  so  there  fell 
down  slain  of  Israel  500,000  chosen  men.  .  .  The 
children  of  Judah  prevailed  because  they  relied  upon 
the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers."  (2  Chron.  13.) 

During  the  reign  of  Jehoshaphat,  a  confederacy  of 
adjacent  nations  came  against  him.  "And  Judah 
gathered  themselves  together  to  ask  help  of  the  Lord. 
.  .  .  Then  upon  Jahaziel  .  .  .  came  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  in  the  midst  of  the  congregation ;  and  he  said, 
Hearken  all  ye.  ...  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  unto  you, 
Be  not  afraid  nor  dismayed  by  reason  of  this  great 
multitude  ;  for  the  battle  is  not  yours  but  God's.  .  .  Ye 
shall  not  need  to  fight  in  this  battle.  .  .  .  Stand  ye  still, 
and  see  the  salvation  of  the  Lord.  .  .  .  to-morrow  go  out 
against  them,  for  the  Lord  will  be  with  you."  (2 


296  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

Chron.  20.)  Accordingly  when  Judah  approached, 
"  and  looked  unto  the  opposing  multitude,  behold  they 
were  dead  bodies  fallen  to  the  earth,  and  none  escaped." 
(Ibid.)  No  more  immediate  revelation  or  direct  inter- 
position than  this  is  any  where  recorded. 

Our  author  endeavors  to  sustain  his  hypothesis,  "that 
subsequently  to  the  age  of  Moses  the  immediate  com- 
munications of  Jehovah,  as  a  general  rule,  ceased ;  and 
that  certain  means  were  made  use  of  for  conveying 
His  revelations  .  .  .  while  the  personal  presence 
of  the  Logos  was  withdrawn" — and  refers  to  certain 
Scripture  phrases,  expressive  of  an  agency  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  towards  the  prophets,  as  "an  intermediate 
agency"  ...  by  which  "the  presence  of  the  Eternal 
Word  was  supplied,  and  His  revelations  were  com- 
municated." This  intermediate  agency,  he  says,  is 
described,  generically,  as  "  the  Spirit  of  God."  His 
object  is  to  make  it  appear  that  in  the  absence  of  the 
Logos,  this  intermediate  agency  was  the  means,  or 
medium,  of 'revelations,  in  distinction  from  that  Personal, 
official  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  which*  as  the 
Scriptures  represent,  He  inspired  into  the  minds  of  the 
prophets  what  they  were  to  speak  and  write.  But  the 
phrases  which  he  quotes,  neither  imply  any  such  thing 
as  he  cites  them  to  prove,  nor  are  they  peculiar  to  the 
ages  subsequent  to  that  of  Moses.  The  very  first  of 
them  indeed  relates  to  Balaam:  "The  Spirit  of  Grod 
comes  equally  upon  Balaam  and  Saul,  as  upon  the 
prophets  Azariah  and  Ezekiel.  .  .  .  The  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  fell  upon  me — Ezekiel — and  said  unto  me.  .  .  . 
The  Spirit  lifted  me  up  and  brought  me  unto  the  east 
gate  of  the  Lord's  house  ...  a  trance  fell  upon 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  297 

Peter  .  .  .  this  and  that  one  were  clothed,  or  en- 
dued with  the  Spirit."  He  adds  other  phrases  in  which 
the  words  "Hand  of  the  Lord,"  and  "Word  of  the 
Lord,"  occur  as  if  they  denoted  a  Divine  influence  by 
which  revelations  were  made — "The  Hand  of  the  Lord 
was  on  Elijah  :  The  Hand  of  the  Lord  God  fell  upon 
Ezekiel.  .  .  .  The  Lord  spoke  to  Isaiah  by  a  strong 
Hand.  .  .  .  The  Hand  of  the  Lord  was  strong  upon 
Ezekiel.  .  .  .  The  Hand  of  the  Lord  was  with  John 
the  Baptist.  .  .  .  The  Word  of  the  Lord  came  ex- 
pressly to  Ezekiel  .  .  .  and  the  Hand  of  the  Lord 
was  there  upon  him.  .  .  .  The  Word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  such  or  such  a  prophet ;  Moses  thus  denotes 
revelations  in  the  time  of  Abraham ;  it  is  used  by  David 
as  well  as  by  those  who  were  officially  prophets." 

The  confusion  and  jumble  of  these  citations,  relating 
as  they  do  to  wholly  different  exertions  of  the  Divine 
agency,  is  such  as  might,  to  intelligent  readers,  render 
comment  superfluous.  Those  of  them  which  state  that 
the  Word  of  THE  LORD  came  to  Ezekiel  and  the  several 
prophets,  and  to  David,  Moses,  Abraham,  and  others, 
denote  in  the  simplest  terms,  immediate  revelations  from 
Jehovah  —  revelations  without  intermediate  agency. 
Very  numerous  and  extended  portions  of  the  Scriptures 
are  introduced  by  this  formulary.  The  voice  or  word 
of  the  Lord  came  to  the  prophets  and  others.  They 
heard  Jehovah  speaking  to  them — heard  His  voice, 
His  words.  Whether  awake,  or  in  dreams,  or  in  vis- 
ions, His  thoughts  and  the  words  which  conveyed 
them  were  realized  to  their  intelligent  consciousness, 
so  that  they  could  remember  and,  as  moved,  infallibly 
speak  and  write  them. 

13* 


298  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

The  other  classes  of  expression  denote  an  agency 
which  had  nothing  to  do  with  revelation,  mediate  or 
immediate,  but  which  produced  effects  on  the  physical 
condition,  or  on  the  courage  or  energy  of  men ;  or  else 
denote  immediate  revelation  and  inspiration.  Thus: 
"  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  came  upon  Othniel,  and  he 
judged  Israel  and  went  out  to  war."  (Judges  3.) 
"  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  came  upon  Gideon,  and  upon 
Jephtha."  "  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  began  to  move 
Samson  at  times  in  the  camp  of  Dan,  (Chap  13  ;)  a 
young  lion  roared  against  him :  and  the  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  came  mightily  upon  him,  and  he  rent  him  as  he 
would  have  rent  a  kid.  (14.)  So  when  he  broke  the 
cords  with  which  he  was  bound,  and  slew  a  thousand 
men,  (15,)  Obadiah  said  to  Elijah,  'the  Spirit  shall 
carry  thee  whither  I  know  not.' ;  (1  Sam.  18.)  When 
the  sons  of  the  prophets  proposed  to  search  for  the  body 
of  Elijah,  they  said  :  "  Lest  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  hath 
taken  him  up,  and  cast  him  upon  some  mountain  or 
into  some  valley."  (2  Kings  2.)  "The  Spirit  entered 
into  me  when  He  spake  unto  me,  and  set  me  upon  my 
feet."  (Ezek.  2,  3.)  "  The  Spirit  took  me  up  ... 
the  Spirit  lifted  me  up  and  took  me  away."  (3.) 
"The  hand  of  the  Adonai  Jehovah  fell  there  upon 
me  .  .  .  and  He  put  forth  the  form  of  a  hand,  and 
took  me  by  a  lock  of  mine  head ;  and  the  Spirit  lifted 
me  up  between  the  earth  and  the  heaven,  and  brought 
me  in  the  visions  of  God  to  Jerusalem."  (Chap.  8.) 
"  The  Spirit  lifted  me  up,  and  brought  me  unto  the 
east  gate  of  the  Lord's  house."  (11.)  "  The  hand  of 
the  Lord  was  upon  me,  and  carried  me  out  in  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  and  set  me  down  in  the  midst  of  the 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  299 

valley."  (37.)  "The  Spirit  took  me  up  and  brought 
me  into  the  inner  court."  (43.)  "  I  am  full  of  power 
by  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord,  and  of  judgment,  and  of 
might,  to  declare  unto  Jacob  his  transgressions." 
(Micah  3.)  "  The  hand  of  the  Lord  is  upon  thy  cattle." 
(Exod.  9.)  "The  hand  of  the  Lord  was  against  them 
to  destroy  them."  (Deut.  2.)  "  The  hand  of  the  Lord 
was  against  the  Philistines."  (1  Sam.  7.)  "The  hand 
of  the  Lord  came  upon  Elisha."  (2  Kings  3.)  These 
expressions,  and  many  others  like  them,  denote  some 
extraordinary  or  miraculous  exercise  of  Divine  power 
wholly  different  from  that  by  which  revelations  are 
made. 

A  different  class  of  phrases,  on  the  contrary,  which 
our  author  quotes  as  of  like  import  with  these,  namely, 
as  denoting  means  or  instrumentalities  of  revelation, 
plainly  signify  immediate  revelations  or  inspirations. 
Thus:  "  The  Spirit  of  God  came  upon  Balaam  .  .  . 
and  he  said  ...  he,  which  heard  the  words  of  God, 
[the  Messenger,]  which  saw  the  vision  of  the  Almighty, 
[the  Messenger,]  falling  flat  on  his  face,  (not  in  a  trance,) 
but  having  his  eyes  open.  How  goodly  are  thy  tents, 
O  Jacob!  and  thy  tabernacles,  O  Israel!"  (Numb.  2-i.) 
Balaam  exercised  the  office  of  a  prophet.  The  Spirit 
of  God  came  upon  him — he  heard  the  words  of  God — 
the  thoughts  and  words  which  he,  in  virtue  of  his  office, 
was  to  speak,  were,  without  any  intervening  instru- 
mentality, and  while  he  was  in  the  full  exercise  of  his 
intelligent  consciousness,  conveyed  into  his  mind  by 
the  Spirit  of  God. 

Samuel  said  to  Saul :  "  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  will 
come  upon  thee,  and  thou  shall  prophesy  ...  a  com- 


300  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

pany  of  prophets  met  him ;  and  the  Spirit  of  God  came 
upon  him,  and  he  prophesied  among  them."  (1  Sam.  10.) 
What  he  said  or  prophesied  is  not  recorded.  But 
whatever  it  was,  the  Spirit  of  God  doubtless  inspired 
it  into  his  mind  while  he  acted  the  part  of  a  prophet. 
So  "  the  Spirit  of  God  came  upon  Azariah  .  .  .  and 
he  said  to  Asa,  Hear  ye  me,  Asa,  and  all  Judah  and 
Benjamin.  The  Lord  is  with  you,  while  ye  be  with 
Him ;  and  if  ye  seek  Him,  He  will  be  found  of  you ; 
but  if  ye  forsake  Him,  He  will  forsake  you."  (2  Chron. 
15.)  Which  plainly  imports  that  the  Spirit  came  upon 
him  expressly  to  impart  to  him  these  words,  and  that 
he,  therefore,  spoke  them  as  of  Divine  authority.  In 
like  manner  Ezekiel  says :  "  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
fell  upon  me,  and  said  unto  me,  Speak ;  thus  saith  the 
Lord  .  .  .  Thus  saith  the  Adonai  Jehovah  ...  I  will 
bring  a  sword  upon  you,  saith  the  Adonai  Jehovah." 
(Ezek.  11.)  What  more  immediate  revelation  could 
possibly  be  made  than  this,  expressed  in  the  words  of 
the  delegated  One,  Adonai,  the  Logos,  as  they  are 

written  ?     Did  Moses  record,  as  from  Jehovah,  anv 

j 

revelation  more  direct  and  exclusive  of  any  intervening 
agency,  instrumentality,  or  means?  Or  is  it  possible 
in  this  case,  or  in  any  case  of  its  class,  to  distinguish 
between  the  revelation  and  the  inspiration?  On  another 
occasion  Ezekiel  says:  "The  Spirit  entered  into  me,  when 
He  spake  unto  me  ...  I  heard  Him  that  spake  unto 
me.  And  He  said  unto  me,  Son  of  man,  I  send  thee 
unto  the  children  of  Israel,  to  a  rebellious  nation  .  .  . 
and  thou  shalt  say  unto  them,  Thus  saith  the  Lord 
God  .  .  .  and  thou  shall  speak  My  words  unto  them." 
(Ezek.  2.) 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  301 

"  The  Spirit  of  God  came  upon  Zechariah  .  .  .  and 
he  said  .  .  .  Thus  saith  God,  Why  transgress  ye  the 
commandments  of  the  Lord,  that  ye  can  not  prosper  ? 
because  ye  have  forsaken  the  Lord,  He  hath  also  for- 
saken you."  (2  Chron.  24.)  So,  on  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost, the  disciples  "  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy 
Ghost,  and  began  to  speak  ...  as  the  Spirit  gave 
them  utterance."  (Acts  2.) 

It  is,  we  trust,  rendered  manifest  by  these  citations 
that  the  revelations  subsequent  to  the  age  of  Moses 
were  as  immediate  as  those  before — that  a  revelation 
in  words  spoken  to  a  king  or  prophet,  was  as  immedi- 
ate as  such  a  revelation  made  to  Moses — that  words 
spoken  by  the  Holy  Spirit  conveyed  a  revelation  as 
really  and  effectually  as  words  spoken  by  Jehovah — 
and,  in  fine,  that  no  new  or  intermediate  agency  what- 
ever was  introduced.  Such  an  intermediate  agency  is, 
indeed,  inconceivable.  A  revelation  from  God,  is  in. 
telligence  communicated  from  Him  to  man ;  and  in  the 
nature  of  the  case,  must  be  immediate  to  those  to  whom 
it  is  primarily  communicated.  To  say  that  if  it  is  in- 
spired by  the  Spirit  into  the  mind  of  a  prophet,  the 
Spirit  is  in  that  act  an  impersonal  instrument,  is  to 
deny  that  He  is  God.  To  say  that  if  communicated 
primarily  and  immediately  to  a  prophet,  to  be  by  him 
announced  to  others,  the  prophet  is  in  that  instance  an 
intermediate  agent,  is  to  trifle  with  the  subject;  for  the 
question  relates  solely  to  his  immediate  reception,  not 
to  his  subsequent  repetition  of  it.  Moreover,  the  later 
prophets  did  not  differ  in  this  respect  from  Moses- 
Both  Jehovah  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  sent  by  Him,  spoke 
to  them  personally,  directly,  immediately. 


302  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

Passing  the  revelations  conveyed  audibly  or  by  in- 
spiration to  the  minds  of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  and  the 
numerous  miracles  wrought  through  their  instrument- 
ality, though  some  of  them  clearly  demonstrate  the 
continual  local  presence  and  agency  of  Jehovah  the 
Messenger,  especially  that  of  the  public  trial  and  con- 
demnation of  the  prophets  of  Baal,  and  that  of  the  sus- 
tentation  of  Elijah  in  the  wilderness,  where  the  Mes- 
senger Jehovah  came  to  him,  we  next  refer  to  the  ex- 
traordinary deliverance  of  Ahab  and  the  Israelites  from 
the  hosts  of  the  King  of  Syria  and  thirty -two  confede- 
rate Kings.  The  express  question  to  be  decided  was, 
as  in  many  other  cases,  whether  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
Israel,  or  Baal,  the  god  of  the  heathen  confederates, 
was  the  Creator  and  Euler  of  the  world.  "  There 
came  a  prophet  unto  Ahab,  King  of  Israel,  saying, 
Thus  saith  the  Lord,  Hast  thou  seen  all  this  great  multi- 
tude ?  Behold  I  will  deliver  it  into  thy  hand  this  day  : 
and  thou  shall  knoiv  that  I  am  Jehovah."  The  result 
was  decisive  against  Baal.  The  next  year,  however, 
they  renewed  the  war,  "  and  there  came  a  man  of  God 
and  spake  unto  the  King  of  Israel,  and  said,  Thus  saith 
the  Lord,  Because  the  Syrians  have  said,  Jehovah  is 
God  of  the  hills,  but  He  is  not  God  of  the  valleys, 
therefore  will  I  deliver  all  this  great  multitude  into  thy 
hand,  and  ye  shall  know  that  I  am  Jehovah  .  .  .  and  the 
children  of  Israel  slew  of  the  Syrians  an  hundred 
thousand  footmen  in  one  day.  But  the  rest  fled  to 
Aphek,  into  the  city,  and  there  a  wall  fell  upon  twenty- 
seven  thousand  of  the  men  that  were  left."  (1  Kings  20.) 

Nothing  in  the  history  of  the  Levitical  dispensation 
is  more  characteristic  of  the  continued  Theocratic  rule 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  303 

than  those  immediate,  resistless,  and  overwhelming 
Personal  interpositions  of  Jehovah,  by  which  the  de- 
votees of  Baal  were  confounded  and  destroyed.  The 
pending  question,  from  the  apostasy  onward,  was  that 
originally  announced  in  general  terms,  between  the 
Seed  of  the  Woman,  and  the  seed  of  the  Serpent ;  be- 
tween Jehovah  in  His  mediatorial  capacity,  as  Head 
and  Leader  of  His  chosen  and  redeemed  people,  and 
Satan  as  head  of  the  apostate  faction.  It  was  especially 
to  demonstrate  and  signalize  the  supremacy,  rights, 
and  prerogatives  of  Jehovah,  in  opposition  to  the  rival 
system  of  the  great  adversary,  who,  under  the  designa- 
tion of  Baal,  arrogated  lordship  and  claims  to  homage 
and  obedience,  that  the  Theocratic  institution  was  in- 
troduced. This  question  was  publicly  arbitrated  in 
the  view  of  human  and  invisible  spectators,  in  the  con- 
troversy with  Pharaoh  and  his  vassals  in  Egypt  and 
at  the  Red  Sea,  with  the  worshippers  of  Baal  in  the 
wilderness,  and  at  the  conquest  of  Canaan ;  with  the 
Pagan  nations  surrounding  Judea,"  and  with  the  re- 
volting tribes  on  various  occasions.  The  oft-recurring 
trials  of  this  question,  involved  the  continued  Personal 
Presence  and  immediate  agency  of  the  Divine  Leader. 
And  hence,  when  the  ten  tribes  were  challenged  as 
being  nominally  of  His  party,  He  directly  interposed 
to  vindicate  His  name,  and  annihilate  His  enemies. 

Ahazia,  the  son  and  successor  of  Ahab,  being  sick, 
sent  messengers  to  "  inquire  of  Baal-Zebub,  the  god  of 
Ekron,  whether  he  should  recover  of  his  disease.  But 
the  Messenger  Jehovah  said  to  Elijah,  Arise,  go  up  to 
meet  the  messengers  of  the  King  of  Samaria,  and  say 
unto  them,  Is  it  not  because  there  is  not  a  God  in  Israel 


304  THE    PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

that  ye  go  to  inquire  of  Baal-Zebub,  the  God  of  Ekron  ? 
Now  therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord,  Thou  shalt  not 
come  down  from  that  bed  on  which  thou  art  gone  up, 
but  shalt  surely  die."  When  the  messengers  returned 
with  this  announcement,  the  King  sent  a  captain  with 
fifty  men  to  command  Elijah  to  come  to  him.  "  And 
Elijah  said  to  the  captain,  If  I  be  a  man  of  God,  then 
let  fire  come  down  from  heaven  and  consume  thee  and 
thy  fifty.  And  there  came  down  fire  from  heaven  and 
consumed  him  and  his  fifty."  The  King  tried  the  ex- 
periment again,  "  and  the  fire  of  God  came  down  from 
heaven  and  consumed  the  second  captain  and  his  fifty." 
This  produced  alarm  and  conviction.  The  King  sent 
a  third  similar  company.  The  third  captain  came  and 
fell  on  his  knees  before  Elijah,  and  besought  him,  re- 
counted what  had  befallen  the  preceding  captains,  and 
begged  for  his  life,  "  and  the  Messenger  Jehovah  said 
unto  Elijah,  Go  down  with  him."  (2  Kings  1.) 

The  history  exhibits  numerous  instances  of  such  im- 
mediate interpositions  of  Jehovah's  power,  both  against 
individuals,  rulers,  armies,  and  people,  inflicting  on 
them  instant  destruction  for  particular  acts  of  disobedi- 
ence and  wickedness,  or  for  public  apostasy  to  the  ser- 
vice of  Baal ;  which  judicial  retaliations  and  inflictions 
were  provided  for  in  the  Theocratic  constitution  and 
among  its  essential  features.  For  Jehovah  as  Head  of 
the  Institution  was  at  the  same  time,  and  in  all  the  acts 
of  His  administration,  the  civil  Lawgiver,  Judge,  and 
Chief  Magistrate,  and  the  Omniscient  Moral  Governor 
of  His  covenant  people.  As  such  He  vindicated  His 
own  rights  and  authority  when  violated  by  those  under 
the  bond  of  the  covenant ;  and  executed  vengeance 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  305 

both  upon  them  and  upon  the  surrounding  pagans  who 
opposed  them  and  set  Him  at  defiance.  Such  visita- 
tions are  often  expressly  foretold  and  threatened,  and 
their  literal  fulfillment  is  recorded  in  connection  with 
the  crimes  to  which  they  have  reference. 

The  genius  of  the  system,  as  locally  combining  a 
moral  and  religious  with  a  social  and  civil  administra- 
tion, and  its  high  purpose  of  antagonism  to  the  powers 
of  evil,  and  of  manifestation  of  the  rights,  prerogatives, 
authority,  and  supremacy  of  Jehovah,  required  that  the 
dispensation  should  be  one  of  outward  and  visible  acts, 
discriminations  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked, 
rewards  of  obedience  to  the  one,  and  visitations  of 
judgment  upon  the  other,  temporal  blessings  and  pun- 
ishments, vindications  of  His  ways  and  demonstrations 
of  His  righteousness.  But  in  order  to  these  exhibi- 
tions— to  the  consistency  of  His  acts  with  His  words, 
and  of  events  with  appearances,  and  to  the  convictions 
to  be  wrought  on  the  minds  of  men,  and  on  those  of  all 
created  intelligences,  good  and  bad,  His  local  Personal 
Presence  was  indispensable.  The  relations,  founded  in 
compacts  and  covenants,  which  He  sustained  to  the 
separated  people,  as  their  temporal  Lawgiver,  their 
King,  the  Captain  of  their  hosts,  the  prescriber  of  their 
conduct,  taking  cognizance  of  their  motives,  detecting 
the  perpetrators  of  secret  wickedness,  audibly  an- 
nouncing His  commands,  and  dispensing  good  and  evil 
according  to  the  moral  deserts  of  individuals,  implied 
His  Personal  Presence  and  immediate  agency.  Ac- 
cordingly He  says  He  was  present.  He  spoke  and 
acted  as  being  present.  He  dwelt  in  the  most  Holy 
place,  of  which  His  sanctuary  in  heaven  was  the  pat- 


306  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

tern,  and  which,  prefigured  the  Body  in  which  He  be- 
came Incarnate.  To  demonstrate  the  reality  of  His 
local  presence,  He  appeared  visibly,  spoke  audibly, 
wrought  miracles  by  His  word,  delivered  His  people, 
and  destroyed  the  armies  of  the  aliens,  by  the  immedi- 
ate exercise  of  His  almighty  power.  He  gave  every 
evidence  of  His  Personal  Presence  in  His  delegated 
character,  that  was  necessary  to  the  faith  of  His  obedi- 
ent servants,  and  that  the  nature  of  the  case  allowed. 

All  the  language  of  Scripture  accords  with  this  view 
of  His  local  Presence  and  agency  throughout  the  pri- 
meval and  Theocratic  dispensations.  Every  where  the 
narratives,  the  prophecies,  and  the  Psalms  assert  or  as- 
sume it,  and  none  the  less  because  in  the  New  as  well 
as  in  the  Old  Testament.  His  Divine  nature  is  often 
referred  to  as  ever  in  heaven.  Moreover,  the  surround- 
ing nations,  worshippers  of  Baal,  the  Egyptians,  the 
Canaanites,  the  Assyrians,  and  others,  believed  Him  to 
be  the  local  God  of  Israel,  that  He  dwelt  in  the  taber- 
nacle, as  by  their  counterfeit  system,  they  imagined 
that  their  antagonist  god  dwelt,  as  a  personal  agent, 
in  the  visible  idol,  and  that  Jehovah  was  propitiated 
and  prayed  to,  as  the  priests  of  Baal  offered  sacrifices 
and  prayers  to  him.  •  The  analogy  every  where  aimed 
at  between  the  antagonist,  rival,  counterfeit  system  of 
Baal,  and  the  original  Theocratic  system  of  Jehovah, 
proceeds  upon  the  assumption  that  each  was  locally 
present.  The  followers  of  Baal  counterfeited  the  mov- 
able tabernacle  of  Jehovah,  by  their  tabernacle  of  Mo- 
loch ;  His  oracle,  by  their  simulated  responses  ;  the  Le- 
vitical  priesthood  and  sacrifices,  by  their  own  hier- 
archal  and  sacrificial  system  ;  His  visible  glory  by  ap- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  307 

propriating  the  sun  to  Baal;  His  miracles  by  the  jug- 
glery of  magicians. 

This  antagonism,  from  beginning  to  end,  is  without 
significance,  except  upon  the  supposition  that  the  fol- 
lowers of  Baal,  in  their  civil  and  religious  polity,  and 
in  their  wars  upon  Israel,  believed  that  they  were  con- 
tending, not  against  the  Supreme  Invisible  Deity,  but 
against  a  local,  personal  god,  between  whom  and  Baal 
a  trial  of  strength  was  in  their  view  by  no  means  des- 
perate and  hopeless ;  not  a  contest  between  human 
weakness  and  infinite  power,  but  as  a  trial  between 
earthly  monarchs — a  trial  between  local  deities  of  lim- 
ited power.  This  controversy,  from  its  first  commence- 
ment, involved  the  moral  and  religious,  as  well  as  the 
social  and  civil  responsibilities  of  the  parties  to  it.  In 
conducting  it  by  a  public  and  visible  administration, 
He  who  is  first  announced  in  His  delegated  character 
as  the  Seed  of  the  woman,  separated  to  Himself  a  par- 
ticular people,  assumed  the  local  relations  and  functions 
of  their  civil  and  religious  Lawgiver  and  chieftain, 
Prophet,  Priest,  and  King,  and  as  such  dwelt  among 
them. 

After  the  accession  of  Uzziah  to  the  throne  of  Judah, 
the  progress  of  degeneracy  and  corruption  in  both 
kingdoms  was  increasingly  rapid  ;  and  for  the  vindica- 
tion of  Jehovah's  administration  over  them,  the  in- 
struction and  guidance  of  His  true  worshippers,  and 
the  revelation  of  His  future  incarnation  and  kingdom, 
a  succession  of  prophets  was  raised  up,  who  recorded 
and  published  the  words  which  they  received  from 
Him.  These  records  are  fraught  with  the  most  decisive 
evidences  of  the  continued  Theocratic  relation,  Personal 


308  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

presence,  and  immediate  agency  of  Jehovah.  For  our 
purpose  of  illustration,  reference  is  made  to  them  col- 
lectively, while  some  further  instances  of  His  imme- 
diate agency  are  selected  from  the  historical  narrative. 

In  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  Sennacherib,  king  of  As- 
syria, invaded  Judah,  and  openly  reproached  and  de- 
fied the  God  of  Israel.  "  And  Hezekiah  prayed  before 
the  Lord,  and  said,  O  Lord  God  of  Israel,  which  dwell  - 
est  between  the  cherubim  ...  I  beseech  thee,  save  Thou 
us  out  of  his  hand,  that  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  may 
know  that  Thou  art  the  Lord  God,  even  Thou  only.  .  .  And 
the  Lord  said,  I  will  defend  this  city,  to  save  it^for  Mine 
oivn  sake,  and  for  My  servant  David's  sake.  And  it 
came  to  pass  that  night,  that  the  Messenger  Jehovah 
went  out,  and  smote  in  the  camp  of  the  Assyrians  an 
hundred  four  score  and  five  thousand  ...  in  the  morn- 
ing they  were  all  dead  corpses."  (2  Kings  19.) 

"  In  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  the 
son  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,  came  this  word  from  the 
Lord,  saying,  Thus  saith  the  Lord ;  stand  in  the  court 
of  the  Lord's  house,  and  speak  unto  all  the  cities  of 
Judah,  which  come  to  worship  in  the  Lord's  house,  all 
the  words  that  I  command  thee  to  speak  unto  them ; 
diminish  not  a  word.  .  .  .  And  thou  shalt  say  unto 
them,  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  If  ye  will  not  hearken  to 
me,  to  walk  in  my  law,  which  I  have  set  before  you, 
to  hearken  to  the  words  of  my  servants  the  prophets 
whom  I  sent  unto  you,  then  will  I  make  this  house  as 
Shiloh,  and  will  make  this  city  a  curse  to  all  the  na- 
tions of  the  earth."  (Jeremiah  26.)  When  the  city 
was  beseiged,  Jehoiakim  taken  captive,  and  the  temple 
partially  plundered,  it  is  written  :  "  Surely  at  the  com- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  309 

mandment  of  the  Lord  came  this  upon  Jndati,  to  re- 
move them  out  of  His  sight."     (2  Kings  24.) 

Prior  to  the  total  destruction  of  the  Temple  and  the 
city,  and  the  extinction  of  the  kingdom,  Jehovah  for- 
mally withdrew  from  the  Temple,  as  related  by  Eze- 
kiel,  (chap.  8,)  and  terminated  the  Theocracy.  He 
appeared  to  the  prophet  in  the  form  of  man,  and  in 
vision  transported  him  to  Jerusalem.  Having  ex- 
hibited to  him  the  abominations  which  were  practised 
there  in  the  temple,  the  tokens  by  which  the  remnant  of 
true  worshippers  was  to  be  distinguished  and  preserved, 
and  the  reasons  of  His  righteous  judgments,  He  passed 
from  the  interior  of  the  Temple  to  the  threshold,  and  as- 
sumed the  glorious  forrn^  in  which  He  had  appeared  at 
the  river  Chebar;  then  "lie  departed  from  off  the 
threshold  of  the  house  and  mounted  up  from  the  earth, 
and  went  up  from  the  midst  of  the  city,  arid  stood  upon 
the  mountain,  which  is  on  the  east  side  of  the  city" 
Mount  Olivet.  This  departure  was  final,  till  His  in- 
carnation. The  ark,  the  cherubic  figures,  and  all  the 
furniture  of  the  Temple,  were  burned  or  otherwise  de- 
stroyed. A  new  building  was  erected  after  seventy 
years,  but  no  visible  glory,  oracular  responses,  sacred 
fire,  or  other  tokens  of  His  Presence,  were  exhibited 

in  it. 

Thus  we  have  shown,  and  shown,  we  presume,  con- 
clusively, that  Jehovah  in  His  delegated  character,  did 
not  withdraw  from  the  Tabernacle,  nor  discontinue 
His  immediate  agency  towards  the  children  of  Israel, 
on  the  occasion  specified  by  our  author,  nor  at  any 
time  thereafter  till  the  exile  of  all  the  tribes  from  the 
promised  land,  the  destruction  of  the  temple,  the  cessa- 


310  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

tion  of  the  Davidic  line  of  kings,  and  the  total  aboli- 
tion of  the  Theocratic  economy ;  and  that  the  evidences 
of  His  continued  local,  Personal  presence,  and  imme- 
diate agency  as  administrator  of  the  Theocratic  system, 
are  as  unequivocal  and  conclusive,  as  those  exhibited 
prior  to  the  death  of  Moses.  Our  author's  hypothesis 
concerning  revelation  and  inspiration  is  therefore  mis- 
taken, imaginary,  and  baseless.  And  since  in  his 
opinion  as  well  as  in  our  own,  the  dynamical  theory 
of  inspiration  can  be  sustained  only  by  assuming  the 
truth  of  that  hypothesis,  his  theory  as  a  whole  must  be 
regarded  as  unfounded  and  unwarrantable. 

The  main  thing  to  be  aimed  at  in  a  theory  of  Inspi- 
ration, and  that  alone,  indeed,  which  renders  any  in- 
quiry into  the  subject  necessary  or  desirable,  is,  to  re- 
concile the  fact,  that  the  words  of  Scripture  are  the 
words  of  God,  with  the  fact,  that  in  style  and  idiom 
they  are  the  words  of  man.  The  delicate  nerves  of 
skeptics  are  sensitive  on  this  point.  Rationalistic  and 
philosophic  critics  deem  it  a  problem  for  scientific  solu- 
tion, on  the  hypothesis  that  the  Scriptures  contain  a 
revelation.  The  alleged,  or  supposed,  irreconcilable- 
ness  of  those  two  facts,  is  the  foundation  of  the  princi- 
pal objections  to  the  Divine  Inspiration  and  authority 
of  the  Scriptures  ;  and  the  principal  writers  in  defense 
of  their  Divine  origin,  have  accordingly  endeavored  to 
reconcile  or  account  for  those  facts.  But  the  methods 
which  they  have  adopted — including  that  of  the  dy- 
namical theory  —  in  so  far  as  they  teach  that  man's 
agency  was  in  any  degree  concerned  in  the  selection  of 
the  words,  have  failed  of  their  object :  1.  Because  it  is 
fully  as  inconsistent  with  the  infinite  intelligence,  infal- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  311 

libility,  and  other  perfections  of  God,  to  suppose  that 
He  would  cause  His  thoughts  to  be  expressed  vocally 
and  in  writing,  in  the  words,  styles,  and  idioms  of  the 
respective  writers,  as  to  suppose  that  He  would  Him- 
self directly  express  them  in  the  same  words,  styles, 
and  idioms.  2.  Because,  if  man's  agency  was  at  all 
concerned  in  the  selection  of  the  words,  to  that  extent 
they  are  his  words  and  not  the  words  of  God,  and  as 
expressions  of  His  thoughts  are  not  infallible.  3.  Be- 
cause a  very  large  proportion  of  the  contents  of  Scrip- 
ture are  expressly  declared  to  be  the  words  spoken  by 
Jehovah  Himself;  and  yet  those  portions  of  its  con- 
tents are,  as  characteristically  as  the  other  portions  ex- 
pressed in  the  ordinary  words,  styles  and  idioms  of  the 
respective  writers  who  recorded  them. 

It  is  plain  that  if  a  very  large  proportion  of  all  the 
words  of  Scripture  are  written  precisely  as  they  were 
spoken  by  Jehovah  Himself,  then,  to  that  extent,  there 
is  nothing  to  be  reconciled.  The  agency  of  the  writers 
of  those  words  could  not  affect  the  question  of  their 
being  literally  and  exclusively  the  words  of  God. 
And  to  that  extent  it  is  clear  that  the  thoughts  of  God 
in  His  own  selected  words  could  be  communicated  and 
were  communicated  to  man  without  any  interference 
of  their  agency.  Their  agency  was  called  for  only  to 
repeat  vocally,  or  to  write,  the  words  which  were 
uttered  in  their  hearing,  or  otherwise  conveyed  into 
their  minds.  But  if  Jehovah  could  thus  convey  His 
thoughts  and  His  words  to  the  intelligent  consciousness 
of  those  who  were  to  write  them,  then  we  may  infer 
with  perfect  confidence,  that  He  could  convey  to  the 
intelligent  consciousness  of  their  minds  His  thoughts 


312  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

in  His  words,  by  inspiring  them  into  their  minds  when 
awake,  or  in  dreams,  in  visions  and  symbolical  exhibi- 
tions ;  so  that  man's  agency  in  the  selection  of  words 
was  no  more  called  for  or  admissible  in  the  one  case 
than  in  the  other. 

The  notion  which  so  engrosses  and  misleads  our  au- 
thor, that  because  the  diction,  style  and  idioms  of 
Scripture  are  like  those  of  the  writers,  there  must,  in 
the  selection  and  collocation  of  the  words,  have  been  a 
combination  of  Divine  and  human  agency,  is  a  ground- 
less fallacy ;  impossible  in  respect  to  all  the  words 
which  were  uttered  audibly  by  Jehovah  Himself,  and 
wholly  unnecessary,  useless,  and  incredible  in  respect  to 
all  the  other  words  of  Scripture.  Such  a  combination, 
indeed,  of  Divine  and  human  acts,  producing  a  result 
exclusively  Divine,  is  inconceivable.  A  Divine  act 
in  selecting  certain  words,  and  a  coincident  human 
act  in  the  selection  of  the  same  words,  can  not  be 
conceived  of  as  resulting  in  a  selection  by  which  the 
words  shall  be  those  of  one,  to  the  exclusion  of  the 
other  party.  That  the  Divine  and  human  agency  are 
concurrently  exercised  in  certain  cases,  is  beyond  a 
question.  Thus  in  the  sanctification  of  believers,  God 
works  in  them  to  will  and  to  do.  But  the  willing  and 
doing  are  their  own  acts,  and  are  uniformly  and  pro- 
perly ascribed  to  them.  In  all  cases  of  joint  or  coin- 
cident agency,  that  which  is  done  by  one  agent  is 
ascribed  to  Him,  and  that  which  is  done  by  the  other 
agent  is  ascribed  to  Him.  The  two  agencies  are  never 
confounded.  Nothing  which  is  effected  by  one  is  as- 
cribed to  the  other.  And  therefore  if  these  two  agen- 
cies are  jointly  concerned  in  the  selection  of  the  words 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  313 

of  Scripture,  the  words  must  be  a  joint  product — partly 
the  words  of  God,  and  partly  the  words  of  man.  There 
is,  we  allege  with  confidence,  no  such  distinction  as 
he  affirms  between  revelation  and  inspiration ;  nor 
any  other  distinction,  except  it  be  between  a  Divine  act 
which  conveys  thoughts  in  audible  words,  and  a  Di- 
vine act  which  conveys  thoughts  in  words  by  inspira- 
tion— speaking  audibly  the  words  which  express  par- 
ticular thoughts,  or  inbreathing,  inspiring,  the  same 
or  other  thoughts  into  the  mind. 


314  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 


CONCLUDING  OBSERVATIONS. 


BEFORE  taking  leave  of  these  discourses,  we  can  not 
forbear  to  refer  to  the  considerations  which  induced  the 
author  to  compose  and  publish  them.  u  Independent- 
ly," he  says,  "  of  the  intrinsic  importance  of  every 
question  co'nnected  with  the  elucidation  of  Holy 
Scripture — the  vagueness  which  too  often  characterizes  the 
language  employed  by  writers  who,  in  modern  times, 
have  treated  of  its  inspiration,  seems  to  render  a  funda- 
mental examination  into  the  nature  of  this  Divine  influ- 
ence daily  more  desirable.  So  long,  indeed,  as  the 
4  mechanical '  theory  of  Inspiration  was  generally  main- 
tained, there  was  no  want  of  distinctness  or  consist- 
ency in  the  views  put  forward.  So  long  as  it  was  be- 
lieved that  each  word  and  phrase  to  be  found  in  the 
Bible — nay,  even  the  order  and  grammatical  connection 
of  such  words  and  phrases — had  been  infused  by  the 
Holy  Grhost  into  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers,  or 
dictated  to  them  by  His  immediate  suggestion,  so  long 
must  the  opinion  held  respecting  Inspiration  have  been 
clear,  intelligible,  and  accurately  defined.  But  such  a 
theory  could  not  stand  the  test  of  close  examination. 
The  strongest  evidence  against  it  has  been  supplied  by 


OF  THE   HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  815 

the  Bible  itself;  and  each  additional  discovery  in  the 
Greek  and  Hebrew  text  confirms  anew  the  conclusion 
that  the  great  doctrine  of  the  infallibility  of  Holy 
Scipture  can  no  longer  rely  upon  such  a  principle  for 
its  defense."  He  goes  on  to  observe  that,  the 
*  mechanical'  theory  having  been  tacitly  abandoned  by 
all  who  are  capable  of  appreciating  the  results  of  cri- 
ticism, and  no  satisfactory  system  having  been  proposed 
in  its  stead,  "  there  has  gradually  sprung  up  a  want  of 
deflniteness  and  an  absence  of  consistency  in  the  language 
used  when  speaking  of  Inspiration,  owing  to  which 
those  who  are  most  sincere  in  maintaining  the  Divine 
character  of  the  Bible  have,  not  unfrequently,  been  be- 
trayed into  concessions  fatal  to  its  supreme  authority. 
And  not  only  is  there  a  vagueness  in  the  language,  .  .  . 
there  is  also  a  want  of  completeness  in  the  method  usually 
adopted  when  discussing  it.  ...  With  reference  to  the 
nature  of  Inspiration  itself,  and  to  the  possibility  of  re- 
conciling the  unquestionable  stamp  of  humanity  im- 
pressed upon  every  page  of  the  Bible  with  that  un- 
doubting  belief  in  its  perfection  and  infallibility  which 
is  the  Christian's  most  precious  inheritance — it  may 
safely  be  maintained  that  in  English  theology  almost 
nothing  has  been  done ;  and  that  no  effort  has  hitherto 
been  made  to  grapple  directly  with,  the  difficulties  of  the 
subject"  (Preface.)  He  adds,  that  with  the  exception  of 
some  brief  remarks  by  Mr.  "Westcott,  and  the  treatise  of 
Mr.  Morell,  he  is  not  acquainted  with  any  works  in  the 
English  tongue,  which  even  profess  to  entertain  the 
question. 

This,  we  doubt  not,  is  a  just  representation  of  the 
state    of  the  subject  in  Great  Britain.      And,  with 


316  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

such  convictions  as  the  author  had  respecting  it, 
and  with  his  religious  affections  and  faith,  and  his 
knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  and  of  the  '  mechanical ' 
theory  of  Inspiration,  we  can  not  but  marvel  that  he 
should  have  been  staggered  by  such  criticisms  and  ob- 
jections as  those  of  Schleiermacher,  Strauss,  Morell, 
Coleridge,  and  other  idealists,  pantheists,  and  rational- 
ists. The  object  of  these  so-called  critics  was,  not  to 
establish  a  belief,  on  any  ground  whatever,  of  the  per- 
fection and  infallibility  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  but  to 
deny  and  exclude  from  them  those  attributes.  No 
critic,  it  seems,  Christian  or  infidel,  German  or  English, 
had  arisen,  whose  object  it  was  to  establish,  on  some 
other  than  the  { mechanical '  theory,  an  '  undoubting 
belief  in  the  perfection  and  infallibility  of  the  Scrip- 
tures.' On  that  theory,  c  there  was  no  want  of  dis- 
tinctness or  consistency — the  opinions  of  those  who 
held  it  were  clear,  intelligible,  and  accurately  defined.' 
But  the  unbelieving  critics  rejected  that  theory ;  pro- 
fessed believers  openly  or  tacitly  acquiesced  in  their 
rejection  of  it ;  and  our  author  yielded  to  their  exam- 
ple. We  heartily  wish  that,  instead  of  yielding,  he 
had  steadfastly  adhered  to  the  so-called  '  mechanical ' 
theory,  and  that  in  his  discourses  he  had  effectually 
*  grappled  with  the  real  difficulties  of  the  subject.'  A 
little  consideration  of  the  nature  of  the  question,  apart 
from  the  assumptions  and  speculations  of  every  other 
school  of  writers,  might  have  convinced  him  that '  even 
the  order  and  grammatical  connection  of  the  words  and 
phrases '  of  Scripture,  was  as  absolutely  necessary  as 
the  words  and  phrases  themselves,  to  express  and  con- 
vey, perfectly  and  infallibly,  the  thoughts  which  the 


\  • 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  317 

Scriptures  were  intended  to  express  and  convey.  No 
other  than  precisely  that  order  and  arrangement,  could 
possibly  have  expressed  precisely  the  same  thoughts 
and  shades  or  modifications  of  thought ;  and  therefore 
if  the  words  of  the  original  texts  in  the  order  in 
which  they  were  arranged,  truly  express  the  thoughts 
which  were  intended  to  be  expressed,  then  that  order 
was  no  less  essential  than  the  thoughts  themselves,  and 
their  relations,  connections,  and  order  of  succession. 
And  if  the  inspiration  is  the  ground  of  the  infallibility 
of  Scripture,  then  the  order  and  grammatical  connec- 
tion of  the  words  must  have  been  determined  by  in- 
spiration. 

A  little  thinking  of  this  sort,  might  have  led  the 
anxious,  conscientious,  earnest,  and  amiable  author  to 
the  following  conclusions : 

1.  That  no  theory  of  Divine  Inspiration  can  be  well 
founded  which  does  not  clearly  and  consistently  es- 
tablish and  account  for  the  fact,  that  the  Scripture — 
every  word  and  phrase  as  given  in  the  original  text,  in 
their  order  and  connection — is  the  express  and  authori- 
tative word  of  God. 

2.  That  if  the  words  and  phrases  in  their  original 
order  and  connection  were  not  so  given  by  Inspiration 
of  God,  as  to  preclude  human  responsibility  and  dis- 
cretion in  their  selection  and  collocation,  it  can  not  be 
shown  that  they  infallibly  express  what  was  intended 
to  be  conveyed,  or  that  they  can  with  propriety  be 
called  the  word  of  God,  or  that,  as  expressing  His 
thoughts  and  will,  they  are  binding  on  the  conscience, 
and  an  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  life. 

3.  That  since  the  Scripture  was  actually  written  in 


318  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

the  words  and  phrases  and  collocations  referred  to, 
and  yet  is  the  authoritative  and  infallible  word  of  God, 
no  possible  criticism  of  the  sacred  text  can  demonstrate 
that  those  words  and  phrases  were  not  given  by  in« 
spiration  in  a  mode  equivalent  to  an  immediate  dicta- 
tion of  them  by  the  Spirit. 

4.  The  criticism,  accordingly,  of  which  the  mechan- 
ical theory  could  not  stand  the  test,  was  that  of  neol- 
ogists,  who  introduced  indefinite  and  inconsistent  lan- 
guage, and  thereby  to  speculative  minds  confused  the 
whole  subject ;  that  of  German  philosophers,  idealists, 
skeptics,  pantheists,  and  atheists,  who  having  no  faith 
either  in  the  doctrines  or  words  of  Scripture,  naturally 
hated  and  opposed  a  theory  according  to  which  the 
Bible  was  generally  believed  to  be  the  veritable  word 
of  God. 

The  main  object  of  this  modern  criticism  is  in 
general  to  show  that  inasmuch  as  the  Scriptures  were 
written  by  men,  and  men  ignorant  of  science,  and  of 
little  culture  in  any  respect,  and  written  in  their  ordi- 
nary language  and  idiom,  it  can  not  be  regarded  as  ex- 
pressing intelligibly  and  accurately  any  supernatural 
doctrines,  or  even  any  historical  or  other  matters  of  or- 
dinary occurrence.  These  critics  write  as  not  believ- 
ing in  any  Divine  inspiration  of  the  sacred  writers  or 
of  what  they  wrote,  or  in  any  special  or  Divine  author- 
ity of  their  writings ;  and  to  evade  and  confuse  the 
subject,  they  institute  various  extreme  and  fanciful 
suppositions,  pretended  contradictions  or  inconsisten- 
cies, hypothetical  distinctions  and  disparaging  compari- 
sons ;  and  introduce  false  issues  and  false  reasonings, 
tending  to  such  conclusions  as,  that,  if  the  Scripture 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  319 

was  written  by  man  in  his  own  words  and  style,  it  can 
have  no  higher  than  mere  human  authority  ;  if  on  the 
other  hand  it  be  ascribed  to  Divine  dictation,  it  is  in 
style  and  diction  unworthy  of  that  source,  and  dis- 
proves itself.  In  a  word,  that  the  language  and  style 
prove  that  it  could  not  have  been  inspired  and  of  Divine 
authority ;  and  that  its  being  written  by  man,  in  his 
vulgar  language  and  style,  prove  it  to  be  fallible  and 
without  authority. 

Hence  in  our  author's  view,  the  great  problem  to  be 
solved  was,  how  to  reconcile  the  Divine  and  human 
elements  in  the  composition;  which  in  his  opinion 
the  *  mechanical '  theory  failed  to  do.  .  .  That  theory, 
under  the  potent  influence  of  the  so-called  criticism, 
"had  been  tacitly  abandoned" — and  no  satisfactory 
system  had  been  proposed  *  in  its  stead.'  Indefiniteness 
and  inconsistency  of  language  in  relation  to  the  subject 
of  inspiration  had  sprung  up.  There  is,  says  the  au- 
thor, '  a  vagueness  in  the  language  which  most  writers 
employ  when  approaching  this  topic,  and  a  want  of 
completeness  in  the  method  usually  adopted  when  dis- 
cussing it.'  To  meet  the  exigency  of  the  case  as  thus 
indicated,  and  with  his  view  of  those  defects  of  the 
'  mechanical '  theory  owing  to  which  it  had  been  tacit- 
ly abandoned,  the  author  projected  his  lectures  on  the 
basis  of  the  '  dynamical '  theory. 

The  distinction  which  the  author  makes  between 
Eevelation  and  Inspiration,  is  obviously  altogether  irre- 
levant to  a  discussion  of  the  nature  and  mode  of  In- 
spiration ;  since,  according  to  his  own  view,  every  por- 
tion of  the  Scripture  was  inspired,  and  he  holds  to  one 
kind  only,  and  rejects  all  pretenses  of  different  kinds 


320  THE  PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

and  degrees  of  inspiration.  "According  to  that  dis- 
tinction," he  writes,  (p.  115,)  "while  Scripture  is, 
throughout  all  its  parts,  inspired,  it  can  not  be  said  that 
all  its  contents  are  revelations"  But  if  all  its  contents 
are  in-spired,  and  by  one  kind  and  degree  of  inspiring 
agency  or  influence,  how  can  the  fact  that  one  portion 
of  its  contents  consists  of  prophetic  announcements, 
and  other  portions,  of  facts  and  doctrines  which  man 
was  incompetent  to  discover,  and  of  which  the  writers 
had  no  previous  knowledge,  serve  to  explain  or  in  any 
manner  to  illustrate  the  nature  or  mode  of  Inspiration  ? 
Surely  that  fact  has  no  conceivable  relation  whatever 
to  the  question  in  hand.  All  the  contents  equally  be- 
hooved to  be  inspired  and  to  be  written ;  and  all  ac- 
cordingly were  inspired,  and  in  one  particular  way, 
that  is,  what  is  written,  whether  previously  known  or 
not,  was  conveyed  into  the  minds  of  the  writers  by  in- 
spiration. If  there  were  diverse  modes  of  Revelation, 
there  was,  according  to  our  author,  and  according  to 
the  Scriptures  also,  but  one  mode  of  Inspiration.  "  The 
gift  of  Inspiration,"  he  observes,  (p.  146,)  "was  equally 
required  by  those  among  the  authors  [writers?]  of 
Scripture  who  had  received  revelations,  as  by  those  to 
whom  Divine  knowledge  was  never  thus  imparted." 
Again,  (p.  148,)  "  Inspiration,  I  must  again  repeat,  is 
to  be  understood  as  denoting  that  Divine  influence, 
under  which  all  the  parts  of  the  Bible  have  been  com- 
mitted to  writing,  whether  they  contain  an  account  of 
of  ordinary  historical  facts,  or  the  narrative  of  super- 
natural revelations." 

The  author  rejects  the  ' mechanical'  theory  of  In- 
spiration, wholly  or  chiefly  because  it  ascribes  too  little 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  821 

to  the  agency  of  man  —  the  human  element  —  and, 
though  it  teaches  that  the  Spirit  "  accommodated  Him- 
self to  the  different  peculiarities  of  the  sacred  writers, 
and  inspired  them  with  those  expressions  which  they 
would  have  employed  had  they  been-  left  to  them- 
selves," it  does  not  account,  to  his  satisfaction,  for  the 
variety  of  diction  and  the  peculiarities  of  style  in  the 
original  text,  and  therefore  he  thinks  it  can  not  be  re- 
conciled "  with  the  highest  aim  of  religion — the  eleva- 
tion and  enlightenment  of  the  faculties  of  man."  (P.  23.) 
He  thinks,  also,  that  the  expressions  above  cited  are 
wholly  hypothetical,  and  "assume  an  exercise  of  the 
Divine  agency  for  which  no  motive  can  be  assigned, 
or  end  pointed  out."  How  he  would  reconcile  with 
the  highest  aim  of  religion  the  fact  that  such  variety  of 
style  and  diction  was  actually  employed  in  the  Bible, 
every  part  and  parcel  of  which  he  holds  to  be  the  in- 
spired word  of  God,  he  has  omitted  to  inform  us.  It 
would  at  least  be  very  natural  to  conclude,  that  since 
the  style  and  diction  referred  to  is,  in  fact,  employed,  so 
that  the  Scriptures  as  written  are  in  the  most  profound 
sense  the  word  of  God;  they  must  be  perfectly  con- 
sistent with  their  object — the  highest  aim  of  religion  ; 
and  that  the  attainment  of  that  object  was  an  assigna- 
ble and  sufficient  motive,  and  an  end  easily  to  be 
pointed  out.  To  say  that  the  Divine  agency,  exerted 
to  produce  a  specific  result,  would  be  without  motive 
or  end,  unless  exerted  in  the  mode  of  a  particular  theo- 
ry, is  preposterous  and  absurd.  And  since  the  Scrip- 
tures throughout  were  given  by  inspiration  of  God, 
and  are  written  in  human  language  and  in  the  ordinary 
style  of  the  writers,  it  is  certain  that  they  are  with  that 

14* 


322  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

characteristic  perfectly  consistent  with  the  Divine  Wis- 
dom and  with  the  highest  aim  of  religion. 

It  is  too  apparent  to  be  overlooked  or  disguised,  that 
if  the  author,  instead  of  devising  a  theory  for  himself, 
adopted  that  6f  another,  it  was  that  of  Mr.  Morell 
which  he  adopted,  with  certain  verbal  modifications  in 
regard  to  the  nature  of  Inspiration,  and  the  distinction 
which  he  affirms  between  inspiration  and  revelation. 
For  that  philosopher  insists  on  an  equally  broad  dis- 
tinction. He  holds  that  revelations  were  immediate 
intuitions  of  Divine  realities,  and  inspiration  was  that 
excitement  or  stimulus  which  enabled  the  mind  to  per- 
ceive them.  He  accordingly  employs  the  same  phrases 
as  our  author:  such  as  "spiritual  intuition,"  uthe 
power  of  spiritual  vision,"  "  dynamical"  in  opposition 
to  "  mechanical,"  and  the  like. 

That  view  of  Inspiration,  which  the  Scripture  itself 
expressly  teaches,  and  according  to  which  the  Omnis- 
cient Being  conveyed  those  thoughts  which  were  to  be 
communicated  to  mankind  in  the  sacred  writings,  to 
the  minds  of  those  who  were  to  write  them,  and  con- 
veyed them  by  vocal  articulation  audibly,  or  otherwise, 
in  their  accustomed  language  or  style,  so  that  they  could 
comprehend,  be  conscious  of,  remember,  and  readily 
and  correctly  speak  and  write  them,  is  consistent  with 
man's  constitution  and  agency  in  the  case,  and  with  the 
fact  that  the  Scripture  as  written,  is  the  word  of  God, 
and  is  adequate  to  all  the  exigencies  and  all  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  case.  It  is  all  that  the  case  required ; 
all  that  behooved  to  be  effected  by  inspiration.  Nor  is 
there  any  incompatibility  or  incongruity  between  this 
view,  and  the  fact  that  revelations  were  made  by  audi- 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  323 

ble  utterances  of  the  very  words  which  are  recorded, 
by  an  equivalent  effect  in  the  prophet's  mind,  causing 
him  to  be  conscious  of  the  thoughts  and  words  in  visions 
and  dreams,  and  by  significant  acts,  types,  and  sym- 
bols. For  whatever  thoughts  were  conveyed  in  these 
latter  modes,  were  conveyed  by  means  equivalent  in 
their  effect  on  the  understanding  and  consciousness  of 
the  recipients,  to  audible  utterances — spoken  words. 
On  this  view,  the  Scripture  as  written,  is  clearly  seen 
and  felt  to  be  the  word  of  God,  as  clearly  as  the  vocal 
or  written  words  of  one  man  by  which  he  conveys  his 
thoughts  to  another,  are  seen  and  felt  to  be  his  words. 

The  subject  is  thus  cleared  of  a  vast  incubus  of  arti- 
ficial and  heathenish  mystery.  It  is  a  plain  matter  of 
conveying  thoughts  in  intelligible  language,  from  the 
Infinite  Intelligence  to  intelligent  creatures  ;  involving, 
so  far  as  the  agency  of  man  is  concerned,  nothing  dif- 
ferent from  our  ordinary  experience,  and  nothing  pecu- 
liar in  any  respect,  except  that  it  is  God  who  conveys  to 
man  what  is  to  be  written,  instead  of  its  being  con- 
veyed by  one  man  to  another,  in  his  ordinary  language, 
or  by  intelligible  and  equivalent  signs.  This  Divine 
Inspiration  of  thoughts  in  words  into  the  minds  of  the 
sacred  writers,  is  therefore  no  more  to  be  illustrated  by 
the  hocus-pocus  of  the  heathen  oracles,  than  an  act  of 
creation  or  a  real  miracle  is  to  be  illustrated  by  the  acts 
of  the  magicians  of  Egypt,  or  by  the  feigned  miracles 
of  heathenish  or  Eomish  device.  The  prophets,  while 
receiving  revelations  and  inspirations  in  words  which 
they  were  to  write,  retained  their  intelligent  conscious- 
ness so  as  correctly  to  understand  and  write  them. 
Whatever  may  have  been  the  effect  of  the  ephod  or 


324  THE  PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

the  minstrel  on  the  mental  or  the  physical  affections  of 
the  prophets,  they  were  used  but  occasionally,  and 
could  have  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  inspiring  agency, 
or  with  the  thoughts  and  words  which  were  conveyed 
by  inspiration.  And  whatever  may  have  been  the 
purpose  and  effect  of  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  ex- 
erted, not  uniformly  and  generally,  but  in  particular 
instances,  on  the  bodies  and  physical  organs  of  the 
prophets,  that  influence,  as  might  be  inferred  from  its 
infrequency,  had  no  natural  or  necessary  connection 
with  the  inspiring  influence. 

"We  conclude  that  there  is  no  foundation  in  Scripture 
nor  any  possibility  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  for  the 
author's  assumption  of  a  combination  of  the  agency  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  with  man's  agency,  in  any  thing  relat 
ing  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures.  The  Scrip- 
tures never  confound  the  two  agencies,  nor  represent 
them  as  combined.  They  expressly  ascribe  the  regen- 
eration of  man  to  an  immediate  act  of  the  Spirit,  as 
distinct  from  any  act  of  man  as  is  an  act  of  creation. 
In  what  succeeds  that  immediate  act  in  the  process  of 
sanctification,  they  assert  a  cooperating,  indwelling,  en- 
lightening, guiding  influence  of  the  Spirit  in  coinci- 
dence with  the  voluntary  acts  and  affections  of  men ; 
but  they  distinctly  ascribe  that  influence  to  the  Spirit 
as  personal  to  Him,  and  those  acts  and  affections  to 
men  as  theirs  exclusively,  and  for  which  they  alone 
are  responsible.  There  is  no  combination  of  the  two 
agencies  producing  a  result  of  the  joint  act  to  be  as- 
cribed to  both  agents  as  if  they  were  but  one  numeri- 
cally and  in  nature,  or  to  be  affirmed  of  one  to  the  ex- 
clusion of  the  other  agent.  Such  a  combination  is 


OF  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES.  325 

impossible,  and  the  conceit  of  it  is  absurd.  It  denies 
or  confounds  all  distinction  between  different  persons, 
agencies,  acts,  and  results.  It  makes  the  acts  of  two 
distinct  persons  the  acts  of  one  person,  which  is  ab- 
surd. The  nature,  personality,  and  acts  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  are  as  absolutely  distinct  and  different  from  the 
nature,  personality,  and  acts  of  man,  as  the  Creator  is 
distinct  and  different  from  the  creature  ;  and  they  can 
no  more  be  confounded  in  one  species  of  phenomena 
than  in  personal  identity.  If  this  is  not  absolutely 
true  and  what  the  Scriptures  absolutely  teach,  then 
Pantheism  has  a  point  to  start  from,  a  fulcrum  to  sup- 
port its  mythic  lever.  But  the  Scriptures  expressly 
teach  that  inspiration  was  a  personal  and  official  act  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  conveying  His  thoughts  in  His  words 
to  men ;  that  what  the  sacred  writers  recorded  was  con- 
veyed to  them  by  His  inspiration ;  that  He  spake  to 
them  in  words  and  phrases  similar  to  theirs ;  that,  on 
the  other  hand,  they  in  the  voluntary  exercise  of  their 
personal  agency,  reiittered  His  words  verbally  and  re- 
corded them  in  writing ;  that  they  spake  to  Him  in 
words  and  phrases  similar  to  His,  making  specific  in- 
quiries and  requests,  to  which  they  received  specific 
answers,  and  making  specific  replies  to  interrogations 
from  Him.  They  treat  of  His  agency  in  these  things 
as  strictly  personal  to  Him  and  perfectly  distinct  from 
theirs,  and  no  more  imply  a  combination  of  His  agency 
with  theirs  in  these  acts,  than  in  the  act  of  creation. 
To  say  that  a  prophet,  as  the  recipient  of  a  Divine  com- 
munication of  thought,  is  active  in  the  conveyance  of 
the  thought  to  himself  because  his  reception  of  it  is  a 
necessary  condition  of  its  being  conveyed  to  him,  is  as 


326  THE   PLENARY  INSPIRATION 

preposterous  as  to  say,  that  in  the  Divine  act  of  creat 
ing  Adam,  Adam  was  active,  because  his  reception  of 
life  was  a  necessary  condition  of  the  Divine  act  being 
exerted. 

Those  who  hold  the  distinguishing  evangelical  doc- 
trines of  the  Bible,  and  who  of  course  hold  the  Scrip- 
tures themselves  to  be  the  infallible  word  of  God,  may 
be  represented  as  defining  Inspiration,  either,  first,  as  a 
Divine  act  which  conveyed  to  the  sacred  writers  both 
the  thoughts  and  the  words  which  they  committed  to 
writing ;  or,  second,  as  a  Divine  influence  exerted  on  the 
faculties  of  the  writers,  by  which  they  were  so  guided 
as  to  render  them  infallible  in  thought  and  in  language. 
The  latter  definition,  considered  as  it  properly  should 
be,  to  relate  equally  to  all  the  contents  of  Scripture, 
must  preclude  the  supposition  of  different  kinds  and 
degrees  of  inspiration,  and  it  must  also  preclude  the 
supposition  of  revelations  being  made  by  inspiration. 
Accordingly,  those  who  hold  this  view,  feel  obliged  to 
assert  a  radical  and  essential  distinction  between  reve- 
lation and  inspiration.  On  this  view,  the  sacred  pen- 
men, so  far  as  they  recorded  revelations  previously 
made,  behooved  to  be  infallibly  guided  only  in  respect 
to  the  words  which  they  employed.  But  in  respect  to 
matters  naturally  within  their  personal  knowledge  and 
experience,  the  guidance  must  have  extended  both  to 
thoughts  and  words  ;  and,  obviously,  it  must  have  left 
them  in  the  free  exercise  of  their  natural  faculties,  in 
their  selection  of  thoughts  and  choice  of  words,  or  else 
it  must  have  left  them  no  discretion  whatever.  On  the 
latter  supposition  they  must  have  been  mere  machines, 
the  process  must  have  been  purely  mechanical ;  the 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  327 

influence  exerted  on  them  must  have  suspended  and 
superseded  the  natural  exercise  of  their  faculties.  In 
this  case,  infallibility,  in  respect  to  what  they  wrote, 
must,  as  in  any  merely  mechanical  process,  be  a  result 
of  the  nature  of  guidance.  But  on  the  other  suppo- 
sition, namely,  that  the  guidance  did  not  in  any  man- 
ner interfere  with  the  free  natural  exercise  of  their 
faculties,  but  only  infallibly  preserved  them  from  error 
in  their  selection  of  thoughts  and  words,  it  is  difficult, 
and  as  we  think,  impossible,  to  see  why  both  the 
thoughts  and  the  words,  as  selected  and  written  by 
them,  were  not  as  truly  and  exclusively  theirs,  as  they 
would  have  been  had  there  been  no  such  guidance  as 
is  supposed.  And  in  that  case,  granting  that  what  they 
wrote  was  truth  only,  without  any  mixture  of  error,  it 
is  difficult  to  see  how  that  entitles  it  to  be  called  the 
word  of  God — uttered  in  His  name  and  on  His  author- 
ity. If  Inspiration  was  a  divine  act  which  conveyed 
to  the  sacred  penmen  all  the  words  which  they  wrote, 
then  there  is  no  difficulty  in  understanding  how  and 
why  they  are  the  words  of  God.  But  if  Inspiration 
conveyed  neither  thoughts  nor  words,  but  only  guided 
the  sacred  writers,  the  subject  is  beset  by  very  grave 
difficulties.  Suppose  a  writer — as  Home  in  his  Intro- 
duction— should,  understanding  inspiration  in  this  lat- 
ter sense,  namely,  as  a  guidance,  an  influence  on  the 
the  faculties  of  man,  endeavor  to  prove  that  the  sacred 
writers  were  divinely  inspired,  and  therefore  that  what 
they  wrote  was  of  Divine  authority,  and  should  adduce 
miracles  and  prophecy  as  proofs.  Does  not  every  one 
perceive  the  incongruity,  nay,  absurdity,  of  supposing 
an  interposition  of  divine  power  supernatural  and  con- 


328  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

tranatural,  to  prove  or  attest  that  a  prophet's  words 
were  uttered  under  an  infallible  guidance,  or  to  prove 
or  attest  any  thing  less  than  that  what  he  uttered  was 
the  authoritative,  infallible  words  of  God,  and  that  the 
utterer  was  but  the  mouth-piece  of  Him  whose  words 
they  were,  and  by  whose  power  the  miracle  was 
wrought  ? 

Does  the  fulfillment  of  the  very  words  of  a  prophecy 
prove  that  they  were  the  words  of  a  prophet  uttered 
by  him  when  subject  to  a  Divine  influence  on  his  facul- 
ties, which  guided  him  in  the  selection,  and  preserved 
him  from  error ;  or  does  the  literal  fulfillment  prove 
that  the  words  of  the  prediction  were  the  very  words 
of  the  Omniscient  Being,  by  whose  providence  over  all 
creatures  rational  and  physical,  the  specified  result  was 
brought  about  ?  "Was  it  in  attestation  of  the  words  of 
Scripture  as  the  very  words  of  God,  or  as  the  words  of 
man  infallibly  guided  and  preserved  from  error,  that 
the  confessors  and  martyrs,  under  the  ancient  and  pre- 
sent dispensation,  suffered  torments  and  sacrificed  their 
lives? 

The  absolute  necessity  of  a  standard  in  the  sacred 
text  that  is  in  itself  infallible  ;  the  meaning  and  author- 
ity of  which  does  not  depend  in  any  degree  upon  falli- 
ble human  wisdom  or  upon  the  intellectual  or  moral 
qualifications  of  the  sacred  penmen,  is  evident  from  a 
variety  of  considerations.  If  there  be  not  such  a  stand- 
ard, then  there  can  be  no  infallible  standard,  no  stand- 
ard of  immutable  authority  over  the  consciences  of 
men. 

In  the  nature  of  the  case,  the  rule  which  prescribes 
what  we  must  believe  concerning  God  and  what  duties 


OF  THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  329 

He  requires  of  us — that  which,  determines  the  nature 
and  results  of  sin  and  holiness — that  by  which  man  is 
at  last  to  be  judged  and  his  destiny  eternally  fixed, 
must  be  infallible.  Neither  its  contents  nor  its  author- 
ity can  in  any  degree  be  ascribed  to  man.  Nor  can  the 
meaning  of  the  rule  depend  upon  the  construction  which 
men  may  put  on  it,  but  must  be  inherent  in  the  rule 
itself  as  delivered  by  the  Lawgiver.  As  well  might 
one  contend  that  the  laws  of  the  physical  universe  are 
not  in  themselves  immutable  and  independent  of  the 
theories  and  constructions  of  men,  as  to  contend  that 
the  Scripture  doctrines  of  faith  and  rules  of  duty  were 
not  unchangeably  fixed  and  certain  in  the  sacred  record 
independently  of  the  agency  of  the  writers. 

The  true  reason  why  different  readers,  students,  ex- 
positors, do  not  understand  the  Scriptures  alike,  is  not 
any  intrinsic  or  necessary  imperfection,  ambiguity,  or 
inadequacy  of  language,  but  is  founded  in  the  corrupted 
nature,  the  darkened  understanding,  the  perverted  wills, 
the  disordered  affections  of  the  fallen  race.  Language 
was  originally  as  perfect  a  vehicle  and  representative 
of  thought  as  the  eye  is  a  perfect  instrument  of  sight, 
and  the  ear  of  sound.  The  words  employed  to  express 
a  particular  thought,  expressed  that  thought  unmistak- 
ably and  perfectly.  And  when  the  mind  is  perfectly 
rectified,  when  in  another  state  or  dispensation,  men 
are  enlightened,  taught  of  God,  so  as  to  see  eye  to  eye, 
they  will  understand  the  sacred  text  alike.  There  will 
be  no  sects,  no  diversity  of  sentiment  in  heaven.  The 
Scripture  standard,  the  inspired  thoughts,  as  perfectly 
expressed  hi  the  inspired  words  of  the  sacred  text,  will 
endure  forever.  It  will  be  the  rule  of  final  judgment, 


330  THE   PLENARY   INSPIRATION 

the  test  by  which  the  thoughts,  words,  affections,  and 
actions  of  men  will  be  tried. 

Hence  the  irrefragable  Protestant  doctrine,  as  ex- 
pressed in  the  Westminster  Confession,  that  all  the 
books  of  "  Holy  Scripture,  or  the  word  of  God  written, 
are  given  by  inspiration  of  God  to  be  the  rule  of  faith  and 
life.  The  authority  of  the  Holy  Scripture  for  which  it 
ought  to  be  believed  and  obeyed,  dependeth  not  upon  the 
testimony  of  any  man  or  Church,  but  wholly  upon  God, 
the  author  thereof ;  and  therefore  it  is  to  be  received  because 
it  is  the  word  of  God.  The  Supreme  Judge,  by  whom 
all  controversies  of  religion  are  to  be  determined,  and 
all  decrees  of  councils,  opinions  of  ancient  writers,  doc- 
trines of  men,  and  private  spirits  are  to  be  exam- 
ined, and  in  whose  sentence  we  are  to  rest,  can  be  no 
other  but  the  Holy  Spirit  speaking  in  the  Scriptures" 

It  is  accordingly  clear  beyond  a  question,  that  no 
church  or  ecclesiastical  body,  no  individual  or  number 
of  individuals,  has  any  right  whatever  to  prescribe  to 
others  any  doctrine  of  faith  or  rule  of  life  as  in  any 
degree  depending  on  their  authority,  or  to  arrogate  any 
right  or  authority  to  enjoin  their  interpretations  of 
Scripture  on  the  consciences  of  other  men.  There  is 
in  this  relation  no  authority  but  that  of  the  word  of 
God. 

It  is  manifest  that  neither  any  individual,  nor  any 
association  or  hierarchy  of  men,  can  have  any  right  or 
authority  to  enjoin  their  interpretations,  doctrines,  or 
faith  upon  other  men,  for  in  the  nature  of  the  case  the 
authority  which  prescribes  and  enjoins,  must  be  infalli- 
ble— incapable  of  erring — exempt  from  all  liability  to 
err.  But  no  individual  man^  nor  any  association  of 


OF   THE   HOLY   SCRIPTURES.  331 

men  can  pretend  to  possess  this  attribute  or  profess 
even  to  have  been  guiltless  of  error  both  in  faith  and 
practice.  As  human  beings  and  members  of  the  fallen 
race,  whether  polished  or  vulgar,  learned  or  ignorant, 
they  are  in  this  respect  on  a  level.  Every  man  has  in 
respect  to  his  moral  relations  to  his  fellow-men,  just  as 
good  a  right  to  entertain  his  false  opinions  as  they  have 
to  entertain  their  true  opinions  on  the  same  subject. 
No  one  has  naturally  any  right  in  any  degree  to  pre- 
scribe and  enforce  his  faith  upon  others.  Nor  has  any 
such  right  ever  been  delegated  to  any  mortal  or  collec- 
tion of  mortals,  nor  can  possibly  be  so  delegated  unless 
it  be  possible  first  to  confer  omniscience,  plenary  and 
infallible  knowledge  on  the  person  or  persons  so  au- 
thorized. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.OO  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


miw 


, 


r— 


LD  21-100m-7,  '40  (6936s) 


c^L 


o 


- 


, 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


PflfP 


. 


I  ill  I  Hi 


